tihvaxy  of  ti\e  trheolojical  ^emmarjp 

PRINCETON  •  NEW  JERSEY 


PRESENTED  BY 

Princeton  'University 
Library 

BT75  .L323 

Lacey,  T.  A.  1853-1931, 
Elements  of  Christian 
doctrine 


THE    ELEMENTS    OF    CHRISTIAN 
DOCTRINE 


<:^ 


i       MAR  18  -1 
THE    ELEMENTS, 


OF 


CHRISTIAN     DOCTRINE 


t.'*'a:'^lacey,  m.a. 


VICAR    OF    .MADINGLEV 


els  yap  iffTiv  vjxSiv  6  SiSdaKaKos 


NEW    YORK 
EDWIN    S.    GORHAM 

CHURCH   MISSIONS   HOUSE,  FOURTH   AVENUE,   AND   22ND  STREET 

I  9  o  I 


saLVa  nos  DoMIne  saLVtarIs  noster 
HoC  saeCVLo  IneVnte  tV  qVI  per 
ANNOS     perpetVos    VIVIs    et    regnas 


PREFACE  TO  THE  AMERICAN   EDITION 

There  has  been  a  long  felt  need  for  some  book  on 
Christian  doctrine  whose  statements  would  be  clear, 
accurate,  concise,  and  yet  scientific.  Several  attempts 
have  been  made  to  produce  such  a  book,  not  a  few 
of  which  are  failures,  some  because  of  individual 
interpretations  of  the  Church's  theology,  others  be- 
cause they  have  dealt  too  much  in  theological  defini- 
tion to  be  adapted  to  the  ordinary  reader.  Mr.  Lacey 
has  avoided  both  of  these  dangers;  for  in  this  book 
he  does  not  exploit  his  own  opinions  nor  attempt  to 
produce  a  digest  of  theology.  He  has  aimed  to  give 
a  summary  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus  Christ  as  the 
Church  has  received  it  and  guarded  it  by  her  defini- 
tions, creeds,  councils,  and  liturgies,  and  he  has 
succeeded  admirably  in  his  purpose.  The  title,  "The 
Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine,"  tells  the  story.  In 
other  words,  the  book  is  a  statement  of  the  principles 
or  component  parts  of  the  teaching  of  our  Blessed 
Lord,  "set  forth   ...    in  their  natural  connection." 

The  Table  of  Contents  furnishes  an  excellent  out- 
line of  the  book  and  is  very  useful  for  reference;  it 
would  be  well  for  the  reader  to  refer  to  it  both  in 
advance  and  in  the  course  of  his  reading  that  he  may 
the  better  keep  up  the  connection  of  the  sections 
and  chapters.  It  behooves  intelligent  laymen  as  well 
as  the  clergy  to  seek  a  clear  comprehension  of  those 
things  which  ought  surely  to  be  believed  concerning 
the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ;  and  to  all  such  this  book 
is  earnestly  commended. 

William  B.   Frisby. 

Church  of  the  Advent,  Boston. 

St.  Luke's  Day,  iqoi.       ii^     i  »  '; '    '  J   ' 

DEC  1  !i34^-^^oI.-Ai-I-^^^-5 

A        — wrmTMWw 


PREFACE 

This  book  is  not  a  theological  manual  ;  it 
treats  of  those  fundamental  truths  which 
underlie  theology,  as  the  facts  of  nature 
underlie  the  natural  sciences.  Neither  again 
is  it  a  manual  of  dogma  ;  it  is  rather  an 
attempt  to  set  out  the  matter  of  which 
dogma,  or  the  settled  judgment  of  Christian 
thought,  is  the  formal  expression.  At  the 
same  time  neither  dogma  nor  theology  is 
ignored.  To  treat  of  Christian  Doctrine 
without  regard  to  theology  or  dogma  would 
seem  to  the  writer  as  foolish  as  to  treat  of 
agriculture  with  a  studied  ignorance  of 
chemistry  and  of  human  experience.  By 
Christian    Doctrine  he   understands  nothing 


vi  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

else  but  the  teaching  of  Jesus  Christ,  re- 
ceived and  retained  in  the  Christian  society, 
guarded  by  the  dogmatic  definitions  of  the 
Church,  analysed  and  systematized  by  the 
labours  of  theologians.  The  elements  of 
this  doctrine  are  here  set  forth,  so  far  as  he 
can  compass  it,  in  their  natural  connection. 

If  the  introduction  seem  disproportionately 
long,  he  would  plead  the  importance  of  the 
preliminary  considerations  to  which  it  is 
devoted.  If  some  questions  that  are  now 
eagerly  debated  have  small  place  assigned 
them,  it  is  because  he  is  not  writing  con- 
troversially. If  the  practice  of  Religion 
seem  to  be  treated  too  broadly  and  generally, 
it  is  because  an  approach  to  detail  would  be 
the  be^inninor  of  a  laro^er  volume  than  is 
here.  Some  minds  are  repelled  by  the  ap- 
parent hardness  of  dogma  ;  some  are  wearied 
with  the  intricacies  of  theology.  What  is 
here  attempted  is  the  simple  presentment  of 
the  living  truth  of  the  gospel,  in  the  form 
which  Christian    experience    and    Christian 


Preface  vii 

science  have  shown  to  be  required.  It  is 
meant  for  persons  of  ordinary  education  ; 
as  far  as  possible  everything  that  calls  for 
even  a  small  measure  of  technical  knowledge 
has  been  either  passed  by  or  set  apart  in 
notes.  There  are  many  ways  of  presenting 
Christian  Doctrine.  In  presenting  it  to  a 
child  one  tries  to  formulate  answers  to  the 
questions  that  naturally  pose  themselves  in 
a  childish  mind.  The  simplest  presentment 
to  an  educated  man  is  one  that  shall  be 
constructed  for  him  in  a  corresponding 
fashion.  This  the  writer  has  attempted. 
If  he  has  not  succeeded,  he  has  at  all  events 
done  his  best. 


CONTENTS 


INTRODUCTION 

PAGE 

Part  I. — The  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrive i 

The  Relation  of  Master  and  Disciple I 

The  Faith  of  the  Disciple 2 

The  Faith  of  Christendom 6 

The  Authority  of  the  Master 7 

The  Christian  Tradition .      .      .            il 

Natural  Religion I4 

Revelation •  I4 

Its  Completeness I5 

Its  Exclusiveness I7 

Its  Interpretation i8 

The  Record 20 

The  Rule  of  Faith 22 

Holy  Scripture 23 

Part  II,  —  The  Content  of  Christian  Doctrine 28 

Supernatural  Truths 28 

The  Language  of  Revelation 3° 

Heads  of  Doctrine 31 

God  and  Creation 3' 

Redemption 32 

The  Church 33 

The  Ministiy 34 

The  Marks  of  the  Church 40 

Practical  Religion 42 


X  TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 


PAGE 


Part  III.  —  The  Proposition  of  Faith 44 

The  Duty  of  believing 45 

The  Sin  of  Unbelief 49 

The  Sufficiency  of  Proposition 50 

Grounds  of  Sufficiency 51 

Credentials  of  the  Apostles 53 

Present  Sufficiency 55 

Limits  of  the  Proposition 60 

Mode  of  Proposition — Ordinary 62 

Solemn 63 

The  Place  of  Theology 65 


CHAPTER    I 

OF   GOD  AND   CREATION 

Sect.  I. — The  Beitig  of  God    .     .           70 

Natural  Knowledge  of  God 70 

His  Unity 71 

Eternity 72 

Infinity 73 

The  Nature  of  Spirit 74 

Errors — Dualism 74 

Monism 75 

Polytheism 75 

Sect.  II.  — 77/,?  Holy  Trinity 76 

The  Divine  Persons 76 

The  Word  Persofi 77 

The  Personal  Distinctions 80 

Procession  and  Generation 81 

The  Double  Procession S3 

Tritheism  and  Unilarianism 84 


Contents  xi 


lAGE 


'ii^cx .  III.— The  Attributes  of  God 85 

Relative  Attributes 86 

Absolute  Attributes 86 

Of  Pure  Being 87 

Of  Knowledge  and  Will 89 

,   Polytheism  and  Anthropomorphism 91 

Sect.  IW  —  The  Creation  of  the  World 92 

The  Beginning 92 

The  Finite 95 

Pantheism 94 

The  Creative  Word 95 

Providence 97 

Deism  and  Evolution 97 

The  Record  of  Creation 98 

The  Divine  Attributes  in  Creation 99 

Sect.  V.  —  The  Spiritual  Creation 1 00 

Body  and  Soul 10 1 

Separate  Spirit 102 

Angels  and  Demons 103 

Knowledge  and  Will 104 

Freedom  of  the  Creature 105 

The  Possibility  of  Sin 106 

The  Divine  Attributes  in  Relation  to  Created  Spirit  .      .  108 

'b'E.Q.i.Nl.—The  Etidof  Man 109 

The  Faculties  of  Knowledge  and  Will 109 

Blessedness in 


CHAPTER   II 
CONCERNING   HUMAN   LIFE 

S^CT.l.— The  Original  State  of  Man 113 

Capacity  of  Perfection 113 

Supernatural  Endowments 115 


xii         TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

PAGE 

Innocence    ..           117 

Supernatural  Righteousness 117 

Sv-cr.  II.— The  Fallen  Siate  of  Man 118 

Disobedience 1 18 

Death 420 

Corruption  of  Nature 121 

Original  Sin 123 

Sect.  III. — Actions  ami  Habits 125 

Determining  Forces ••      .  125 

Mixture  of  Good  and  Evil 127 

Power  to  keep  the  Commandments 127 

Corruption  of  Human  Society — 

Injustice 129 

Toleration  of  Evil 130 

The  Balance  of  Good  and  Evil 131 

Actual  Sin 132 

Sect.  IV.  —  The  Promise  of  Salvation 133 

The  Need  of  Supernatural  Help 133 

The  Hope  of  Israel 134 

The  Healing  of  the  World 135 

The  Preparation  of  the  Gospel — 

Prophecy 136 

Sacrifice 138 


CHAPTER    III 
CONCERNING    REDEMPTION 

Sect.  I. — The  Imamation 142 

The  Likeness  of  God  restored 143 

The  Purpose  of  the  Incarnation 144 


Contents  xiii 

PAGE 

The  Person  of  the  Incarnate 145 

The  Two  Natures 148 

The  Human  Life  of  Christ 151 

The  Emptying 152 

The  Twofold  Knowledge 153 

The  Twofold  Will      .  ^ •    •  I5S 

Sect.  II. —  The  Atonement 156 

The  Priesthood  of  Christ 158 

His  Sacrifice 159 

The  Lord's  Supper l6i 

The  Continual  Sacrifice ■      .      .  162 

Theological  Terms 164 

Sect.  III. — The  Doctrine  of  Grace 166 

Universality  of  Redemption 166 

Supernatural  Grace 167 

In  the  Humanity  of  Christ 168 

In  all  the  Redeemed 169 

Continuing 170 

Auxiliary  Grace 1 70 

Charismata 172 

Effect  of  Grace — Justification 173 

Sanctification 176 

Theological  Terms 176 

Sect.  IV. — Eternal  Life 178 

Regeneration 1 78 

Death  unto  Sin j^9 


The  Second  Death 


179 


Growth  in  Grace l8i 

The  Potential  and  the  Actual 182 

Communication  of  the  Divine  Life 183 

The  Eternity  of  the  Gift 184 

The  Resurrection  of  the  Body 185 

The  State  of  the  Separated  Soul 187 


xiv        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 


CHAPTER   IV 

CONCERNING   THE   CHURCH 

I'AGE 

Sect.  I.  —  The  Christian  Society 191 

The  Redemption  of  the  World 191 

The  j£"fr/<?J?«— of  the  Old  Testament 192 

of  the  New  Testament 193 

Election  and  Calling 196 

The  Kingdom  of  God 198 

The  Body  of  Christ 200 

The  Members  of  the  Cliurch 200 

Those  cut  off 201 

The  Faithful  departed -  .  202 

Sect.  II. — The  Characteristics  of  the  Church 204 

Unity — Numerical 204 

Moral 204 

Jew  and  Gentile 205 

Practical     .      .      ■• 207 

Of  Local  Churches 210 

Holiness— Essential 211 

Priesthood 213 

Practical 214 

Catholicity 215 

Of  Particular  Churches 216 

Apostolicity 217 

Sect.  III. — The  Oi-gani-Mtion  of  the  Church 218 

Societies  Natural  and  Artificial 218 

Officers  of  the  Church — Apostles 220 

The  Threefold  Ministry 222 

In  Later  Times 224 

Divine  Appointment  of  the  Hierarchy  ...           .      .  225 

Unity  of  the  Hierarchy 226 

Power  of  Ordination 227 

Priesthood 229 


Contents  xv 


PAGE 


Sect.  IV. —  The  Ministry  of  the  Word 232 

The  Teaching  Commission 233 

Authority 234 

The  making  of  Disciples 235 

Binding  and  Loosing 236 

The  Word 238 

Definition 239 

The  Canons  of  the  Church 239 

Sect,  V.  —  Tlu  Ministry  of  the  Sacravieiits 241 

Mysteries — the  Meaning  of  the  Word 241 

The  Christian  Mysteries 244 

The  Latin  Sacratnentwn 245 

The  Number  of  the  Sacraments 247 

The  Doctrine  of  the  Sacraments 248 

Matter  and  Form 248 

The  Minister 250 

Intention 250 

Effect 251 

The  Seven  Sacraments — Baptism 252 

Confirmation 253 

Penance 254 

The  Lord's  Supper    ....  257 

Ordination 258 

Marriage 260 

Unction 261 

Sacramental  Character 262 

The  Necessity  of  the  Sacraments 263 


CHAPTER   V 

CONCERNING   PRACTICAL  RELIGION 

Sect.  I.  —  Conscience 265 

A  Natural  Faculty  in  Man 266 

Judging  Right  and  Wrong 267 


xvi         TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

PAGE 

The  Standard  of  Judgment 269 

The  Christian  Conscience 270 

The  Weak  Conscience 271 

Probability 273 

Responsibility  for  Conscience 274 

Sect.  \\.—Dnty 275 

The  Nature  of  Obligation 275 

Morality — Natural 276 

Revealed 276 

Judaic 278 

Christian 279 

Social  and  Individual  Duty 280 

Obedience  to  Authority 282 

Ordinances 283 

Apparent  Conflict  of  Duties       .......  285 

Precepts  and  Counsels 285 

Complications  of  Duty 287 

Sect.  III. — Perfection 289 

The  Meaning  of  Perfection — Ultimate 289 

Present 290 

Patria  and  Via    ....  290 

Perfection — of  Condition 292 

of  Life      .      .            ...                  ...  294 

Charity  the  End  of  the  Commandment 295 

APPENDIX 299 

INDEX 313 


INTRODUCTION 


Part  I. — The  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Christian  doctrine  is  that  which  is  taught  by  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  Teaching  impUes  the  relation  of  Master 
and  Disciple,  and  we  must  understand  at  the  outset  in 
what  this  relation  consists.  We  are  not  to  follow  the 
analogy  of  those  sciences  in  which  the  learner  has  to 
make  his  way  chiefly  by  investigation,  aided  only  by  an  in- 
structor whose  function  is  to  direct  his  studies,  to  remove 
difficulties,  and  to  solve  doubts.  We  must  think  of  the 
master  rather  as  one  whose  work  is  to  convey  information 
not  otherwise  accessible,  and  to  lay  down  principles  not 
founded  in  the  first  instance  on  experience  or  observa- 
tion. Christian  doctrine  is  concerned  with  Divine  truths, 
which  a  man  by  searching  can  find  out  very  imperfectly, 
if  at  all.  There  are  certain  truths  of  Natural  Religion,  as 
it  is  called,  which  a  man  might  conceivably  discover  by 
investigation,  but  such  investigation  is  rarely  undertaken. 
The  truths  of  Natural  Religion  are  commonly  known  by 
tradition,  the  original  source  of  which  cannot  be  his- 
torically traced ;  they  are  received  in  childhood,  retained 
or  lost  according  to  the  uncertain  effect  of  the  experience 
of  life.  Christian  doctrine  does  not  ignore  these  truths 
or  pass  them  by,  but  neither  does  it,  properly  speaking, 

B 


2  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

build  upon  them ;  that  is  to  say,  it  does  not  use  them  as 
principles  from  which  all  further  knowledge  of  the  kind 
is  deduced.  It  assumes  them  as  already  known,  and 
proceeds  to  convey  the  knowledge  of  other  truths,  not 
contained  in  them  by  necessary  implication,  not  dis- 
covered or  discoverable  by  any  learner,  but  taught  by 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  Master, 

The  relation  of  master  and  disciple  is  partly  objective 
and  external,  partly  subjective  and  internal.  As  external, 
the  relation  consists  in  the  fact  that  what  is  taught  is 
delivered  by  the  master  and  received  by  the  disciple 
without  question ;  as  internal,  it  consists  in  a  real  assent 
of  the  disciple  to  the  teaching  of  the  master,  an  assurance 
that  he  knows  the  truth  and  is  declaring  it.  To  under- 
stand the  relation  fully,  we  must  therefore  consider  the 
assent  of  the  disciple,  the  authority  of  the  master,  and 
the  matter  of  the  teaching. 

The  assent  of  the  disciple  in  regard  to  Christian 
doctrine  is  called  Faith.  The  word  is  used  in  all 
relations  of  trust  between  man  and  man  ;  it  may  express 
the  confidence  in  which  a  learner  receives  the  instruction 
of  any  teacher.  Such  confidence  is  instinctive  in  child- 
hood ;  in  manhood,  if  reasonable,  it  is  the  fruit  of 
experience,  and  an  unreasonable  confidence  in  any  man 
is  counted  among  the  worst  of  follies  :  if  I  have  faith  in 
a  teacher  it  is  because  I  have  found  him  thoroughly 
master  of  his  subject,  and  honest  in  delivering  what  he 
knows.  P)Ut  the  faith  required  for  acceptance  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  Master  goes  beyond  this.  His 
teaching  is  concerned  for  the  most  part  with  things  out- 
side the  range  of  experience.  It  can  be  verified,  if  at 
all,  only  as  a  consequence  of  the  most  unqualified 
acceptance;  it  is  a  privilege  of  the  highest  Christian  life 
to  find  experimental  proof  of  those   things   which  liave 


The  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrine  3 

l)eeii  confidently  believed,  I'his  experience,  therefore, 
cannot  be  the  foundation  of  discipleship.  Faith  in  Christ 
is,  then,  something  different  from  confidence  in  a  man. 
It  is  conviction,  anterior  to  all  proof,  which  is  expressed 
with  the  fervour  of  St.  Peter,  "  Thou  hast  the  words  of 
eternal  life." 

This  is  not  to  say  that  faith  of  the  kind  which  stands 
between  man  and  man  has  no  place  in  our  relation  to  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  He  made  use  of  miracle  to  inspire 
a  confidence  based  on  evidence ;  the  known  experience 
of  the  saints,  and  the  lessons  of  Christian  history,  serve 
the  same  purpose  in  all  ages.  Such  evidence  may  attract 
men  to  him  as  Master,  or  may  help  them  to  resolve  doubts, 
but  it  cannot  of  itself  bring  about  the  relation  of  disciple- 
ship. It  may  enforce  the  conviction  that  he  is  not  as 
other  men  are,  that  he  has  some  special  power  and 
knowledge,  and  a  claim  altogether  unique  to  attention 
and  reverence  ;  it  may  remove  a  natural  hesitation  to 
believe  stupendous  affirmations  which  cannot  be  verified 
by  experience  ;  it  cannot  produce  the  unfaltering  assurance 
that  what  he  taught  is  true.  The  faith  of  a  Christian 
reaches  even  to  this.  It  is  something  apart  from  our 
natural  experience.  In  the  words  of  St.  Paul,  it  is  the 
gift  of  God.  All  our  natural  powers  are  indeed  given  by 
God,  but  faith  is  a  gift  special  and  apart.  In  a  word,  it 
is  supernatural.  Of  its  source  there  will  be  more  to  say 
afterwards ;  at  present  we  are  concerned  only  with  its 
working. 

Faith  is  the  assurance  of  things  hoped  for,  the  proving 
of  things  not  seen}  It  is  concerned  alike  with  things 
future,  and  therefore  not  yet  knowable,  and  with  things 
present  indeed,  but  not  present  to  our  senses  in  such  a 
way  as  to  be  matter  of  knowledge.     Things  Aiture  are 

'   Ileb.  xi.  I. 


4  ///('  Elemejits  of  Christian  Doctrine 

hoped  for.  There  is  a  kind  of  iin-easonable  hope  which 
is  begotten  only  of  vehement  desire.  We  put  that  aside  ; 
the  assured  hope  here  spoken  of  looks  for  a  thing,  either 
on  the  ground  of  a  promise,  or  because  it  is  likely  to 
occur  in  the  ordinary  sequence  of  cause  and  effect.  But 
what  is  the  ground  of  this  likeliness  ?  Why  do  I  expect 
things  to  occur  in  orderly  sequence  ?  Because  of  habit 
and  training,  no  doubt ;  but  my  confident  expectation  is 
ultimately  founded  on  a  conviction  that  nature  is  rationally 
ordered,  controlled,  that  is  to  say,  by  an  intelligence  to 
which  my  own  mind  is  in  a  measure  correspondent,  and 
the  working  of  which  I  can  follow.  But  to  be  convinced 
of  this  is  nothing  else  than  to  believe  in  (iod  the  Creator. 
My  own  limited  and  partial  experience  of  the  universe 
can  furnish  me  only  with  a  very  uncertain  and  irrational 
expectation  of  the  sequence  of  an  effect  upon  its  cause  : 
it  may  be  an  irresistible  expectation,  but  I  can  have  no 
certainty  that  it  will  not  be  disappointed.^  An  assured 
expectation  depends  on  a  belief  in  the  consistent  and 
luiiform  working  of  the  universe  according  to  the  ^^■  ill  of 
God.  What  we  call  a  Natural  Law  is  a  statement  of  this 
^^'ill  so  far  as  it  is  known  to  us  by  inference  from  its 
results.  But  a  necessary  condition  of  such  inference  is 
the  belief  that  God  is  consistent  with  liimself,  unchanging 
in  purpose.  An  expectation  founded  on  this  belief  is 
obviously  near  akin  to  one  founded  on  trust  in  a  promise 
made  by  God.     In  either  case  it  depends  on  confidence 

'  The  doctrine  of  Hume,  that  the  determination  of  the  mind  l)y 
customary  experience  to  expect  one  object  folio\Niiig  another  in 
time  is  tiie  only  source  of  our  idea  of  causation  (  Treatise  oj  Human 
A^alure,  vol.  i.  p.  450,  ed.  Green  and  Grose),  is  all  but  certainly 
true  as  a  matter  of  empirical  psychology.  It  does  not  follow  that 
causation  is  purely  subjective,  nor,  as  Hume  thought,  that  we  cannot 
transcend  the  subjective  idea. 


The  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrine  5 

in  him  that  he  is  true  to  himself.  In  the  one  case  we 
have  that  faith  which  is  a  part  of  Natural  Religion  ;  in  the 
other  case  we  have  the  faith  which  is  proper  to  a  Christian. 
This  faith  is  the  assurance  of  things  hoped  for  on  the 
ground  of  a  promise  made  by  God  through  Jesus  Christ 
our  Lord. 

But  Christian  doctrine  is  not  concerned  only  with 
things  future,  and  therefore  not  seen  as  yet.  Wo.  are 
taught  of  things  present,  but  unknowable  save  as  learnt 
from  this  direct  teaching.  They  are  things  not  seen,  things 
of  which  neither  sense  nor  intellect  has  any  direct 
apprehension,  but  which  nevertheless  are  made  known  to 
us  by  faith.  We  must  be  careful  of  our  meaning  here. 
\Ve  do  not  mean  that  we  become  acquainted  with  these 
things  by  a  sort  of  supernatural  intuition  or  inspiration  to 
which  we  give  the  name  of  Faith.  The  word  faith^  as 
used  in  this  connection,  does  not  depart  from  its  ordinary 
meaning.  AVe  learn  these  things  from  the  words  of  a 
Master,  to  whose  teaching  is  given  the  full  assent  of  the 
disciple.  Faith  is  the  firm  conviction  that  the  Master 
knows  what  he  is  teaching,  and  teaches  truly.  It  is  not 
therefore  independent  either  of  sense  or  of  intellect.  The 
material  of  faith  must  be  received  in  the  ordinary  course 
of  instruction — heard,  that  is  to  say,  and  understood. 
"  Belief  cometh  of  hearing,"  says  St.  Paul,  "  and  hearing 
by  the  word  of  Christ."  But  sense  and  intellect  can  go 
no  further  in  dealing  with  these  things ;  they  can  only 
receive,  they  cannot  verify  what  is  received.  This 
limitation  will  be  better  understood  if  we  bring  into 
comparison  their  activity  in  other  matters.  We  receive 
historical  information  from  the  statements  of  those  who 
profess  to  know  the  facts ;  their  statements  are  tested 
by  comparison  with  those  of  other  authorities,  by 
documentary  and  other  evidence  ;  a  doubtful  assent  may 


6  TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

be  given  to  the  unsupported  statement  of  a  single  author, 
but  if  he  be  one  whose  other  statements  have  been  tested 
and  found  generally  trustworthy,  we  accept  with  the  less 
misgiving  what  he  alone  asserts.  All  historical  know- 
ledge rests  on  faith  in  authorities,  but  a  faith  which  in 
its  turn  depends  on  a  verification  done  by  the  intellect 
in  the  process  of  receiving  information.  Again,  when 
we  receive  information  directly  through  the  senses,  we 
verify  it  by  careful  observation  or  experiment,  that  is  to 
say,  by  comparing  phenomena,  and  by  applying  the 
])rinciple  of  causation.  From  viewing,  for  example,  the 
apparent  motions  of  the  heavenly  bodies  we  advance  to 
the  science  of  astronony.  In  learning  about  such  matters 
we  arrive  at  various  degrees  of  certainty  or  probability, 
and  according  to  the  degree  we  call  our  mental  state 
knowlcdi^e  or  opinion.  These,  then,  depend  upon  evidence. 
But  for  the  truths  contained  in  Christian  doctrine  there 
is  no  evidence  of  this  kind :  there  is  only  the  word 
of  the  Master.  The  experience  which  may  verify  them 
itself  depends  upon,  and  therefore  cannot  precede,  the 
hearty  acceptance  of  the  teaching.  They  are  accepted  in 
pure  trust,  by  the  simple  assent  of  the  disciple.  Faith  is 
the  proving  of  things  not  seen. 

Faith  is  a  proof  to  him  wlio  believes.  It  is  not 
evidence  by  which  others  can  be  convinced.  The  disciple 
is  satisfied  about  the  truth  of  what  he  is  taught,  because 
he  has  faith  in  the  Master ;  he  cannot  convey  his  satis- 
faction to  another ;  faith  is  incommunicable,  and 
strictly  individual.  But  we  use  the  word  in  a  derived 
sense,  speaking  of  the  Catholic  Faith,  the  Faith  of  the 
Church  or  of  Christendom.  The  word  was  used  by  St. 
Paul  in  this  secondary  sense.  It  means  the  whole  body 
of  truths  which,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  are  believed  by 
Christian  men.     They  are  not  held  by  a  corporate  act  of 


The  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrine  J 

faith,  but  severally  by  the  faith  of  individuals  in  agree- 
ment. The  fact  that  all  Christians  do  believe  these 
things  is  no  proof  that  what  they  believe  is  true.  The 
faith  of  many  is  no  more  evidence  than  the  faith  of  one. 
If  a  thing  which  is  verifiable  by  ordinary  human  experience 
be  generally  taken  for  true,  this  general  belief  is  evidence 
of  considerable  weight,  though  the  history  of  popular 
delusions,  even  about  matters  easily  verified,  shows  how 
cautiously  it  should  be  received ;  but  the  truth  of  a  thing 
commonly  unverifiable  is  no  whit  established  by  the 
common  consent  of  all  mankind.^ 

Such  common  consent  has,  however,  a  value.  It 
cannot  prove  the  truth  of  what  is  believed ;  but  it  shows 
that  there  are  reasons  for  the  belief,  and  reasons  which 
have  been  found  cogent  to  enforce  assent.  In  like 
manner,  the  general  assent  of  Christian  men  to  certain 
teaching  cannot  in  any  way  prove  that  teaching  true,  but 
it  shows  that  some  reason  has  been  found  for  believing 
it  to  be  true.  Such  reason  can  only  be  found  in  the 
authority  of  the  Master.  The  general  assent,  therefore, 
shows  that  Christians  at  least  suppose  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  to  have  delivered  this  teaching.  But  here  is  an 
historical  belief  subject  to  verification.  The  general 
assent  to  certain  doctrines,  or  the  faith  of  Christendom, 
has  a  definite  value  as  evidence  to  prove  that  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  did  in  fact  teach  those  things  that  are 
believed.  It  is  part  of  the  historical  evidence  for  the 
facts  of  his  life  and  teaching.     To  test  and  justify  the 

'  Thorndike,  Epilogue,  Part  i.  p.  149:  "What  contradictions 
soever  are  held  among  Christians,  nevertheless  they  are  sensible  that 
no  man's  private  spirit,  that  is,  any  evidence  of  Christian  truth  in  the 
mind  of  one  man,  can  oblige  another  man  to  follow  it,  because  it 
imports  no  evidence  to  make  that  which  he  thinks  he  sees  ajipear  to 
otliers  "  {Works,  vol.  ii.  part  i.  p.  378,  ed.  1845). 


8  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

record  is  the  study  of  Cliristian  evidences.  The  kind  of 
evidence  and  the  amount  of  evidence  required  for 
certainty  varies  almost  with  every  mind :  some  are 
satisfied  with  the  simplest  tradition,  others  require  a 
detailed  investigation. 

So  far  there  is  no  room  for  the  function  of  Christian 
faith ;  it  is  only  when  the  fact  is  fully  accepted  that  the 
Lord  Jesus  as  Master  taught  such  and  such  things,  that 
faith,  the  assent  of  the  disciple,  can  begin.  Nor  is  the 
measure  of  a  man's  faith  in  any  way  affected  by  his 
readiness  to  become  a  disciple.  An  easy  acceptance  of 
the  historical  facts  of  our  Lord's  teaching  does  not  pre- 
dispose any  one  to  a  real  belief  in  the  teaching  as  true  ; 
the  most  cautious  and  sceptical  attitude  of  mind  towards 
the  historical  record  does  not  hinder  the  entire  assent 
of  the  disciple,  when  once  the  record  is  made  good. 
Hooker,  in  his  sermon  on  the  Certainty  of  Faith  in  the 
Elect,  finely  develops  the  scholastic  distinction  between 
the  Certainty  of  Evidence  and  the  Certainty  of  Adherence. 
The  former  has  many  degrees,  is  painfully  built  up,  and 
may  again  be  shaken  by  doubts;  the  latter  is  firmly 
rooted  in  a  moral  conviction,  //  is  good  for  me  to  hold 
me  fast  by  God.  This  latter  certainty  is  the  ground 
of  the  Faith  of  the  Disciple.' 

This  faith  or  assent  of  the  disciple  is  not  a  mere  blind 
confidence.  It  goes  with  an  intelligent  appreciation  of 
the  authority  of  the  master.  Such  authority  is  of  two 
kinds.  The  one  is  personal :  the  master  speaks  with 
authority  because  he  inspires  confidence  by  his  character 
and  by  the  conscious  possession  of  knowledge.  The 
other  is  ofificial,  resting  on  a  commission.  In  a  purely 
human  organization  such  a  teaching  commission  may  be 
given  as  guarantee   of  competency  by  any  recognized 

'  Hooker,  Works,  vol.  iii.  p.  470,  cd.  Keblc. 


The  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrine  9 

source  of  authority  ;  for  the  thuigs  of  God,  with  which 
Christian  doctrine  is  concerned,  the  one  source  of 
authority  is  the  self-knowledge  of  God  himself.  Both 
kinds  of  authority  are  specially  attributed  to  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  as  Master.  "  We  know  that  thou  art  a 
teacher  come  from  God,"  said  Nicodemus,  putting  him- 
self definitely  in  the  position  of  a  disciple.  "  The 
multitudes  w'ere  astonished  at  his  teaching ;  for  he 
taught  thenr  as  one  having  authority,  and  not  as  their 
scribes."  The  scribes  had  authority  by  commission,  as 
sitting  in  Moses'  seat,  but  they  lacked  that  note  of 
personal  authority  which  marked  his  teaching.  It  was 
indicated  in  the  form  of  words,  "  /  say  uiiio  you,"  by 
which  he  himself  set  his  own  teaching  in  contrast  with 
theirs.  The  authority  of  the  Master  is  thus  twofold — 
objective,  in  that  he  is  recognized  as  coming  from  God ; 
subjective,  in  that  he  impresses  on  men  a  sense  of  his 
incommunicable  superiority.^ 

For  the  function  of  Master  no  more  is  needed.  It  is 
enough  for  a  disciple  to  know  that  he  is  taught  by  one 
who  comes  from  God,  and  who  speaks  with  personal 
authority.  The  relation  of  discipleship  is  now  established. 
What  is  afterwards  learnt  about  the  person  of  the  Master 
strengthens,  indeed,  the  certainty  of  the  assent  given  by 
the  disciple,  but  cannot  be  in  any  way  the  ground  of 
that  certainty.  The  assent  must  be  secured,  the  relation 
of  discipleship  established,  before  this  further  knowledge 
can  be  acquired ;  for  it  is  derived  exclusively  from  the 
teaching  of  the  Master  himself.  When  w^e  have  learnt 
that  he  is  not  merely  come  from  God,  but  is  himself 
God,  is  not  merely  the  Illuminator,  but  is  himself  the 
Light,  God  of  God,  Light  of  Light,  our  faith  is  confirmed ; 
but   unless   we   already  had   the   faith   of  the   disciple, 

"   Matt.  vii.  29  ;  xxiii.  2  ;  John  iii.  2. 


lo         TJie  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

we  could  not  have  learnt  this.  St.  Peter  had  to  be  for 
some  time  a  disciple,  he  had  to  attain  the  confidence  in 
which  he  said,  "  At  thy  word  I  will  let  down  the  nets," 
and  to  make  the  declaration  of  faith,  "  Thou  hast  the 
words  of  eternal  life,"  before  he  could  arrive  at  his 
ultimate  confession,  "  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the 
living  God."^  This  that  is  afterwards  learnt  accounts 
for  and  explains  the  note  of  inherent  and  personal 
authority  which  made  an  impression,  originally  inex- 
plicable, on  the  hearers  of  the  Lord's  teaching.  The 
authority  of  the  Master,  real  and  objective,  though 
not  yet  known  in  its  full  reality,  made  an  impression 
subjectively  on  those  who  heard  him,  and  drew  them  to 
him  as  disciples.  The  record  of  his  teaching  still  has 
the  same  effect,  and  so  the  relation  of  discipleship  is 
continually  renewed  in  succeeding  generations.  This 
relation  once  established,  the  disciple  learns  the  whole 
truth  about  the  Master,  and  his  faith  is  confirmed. 

The  authority  of  the  Master  is  incommunicable.  It 
would  not  be  so  if  it  were  an  authority  only  of  commission. 
The  Prophets  also  were  teachers  come  from  God.  To 
the  Apostles  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  conveyed  the  fulness 
of  his  own  mission  :  "  As  the  Father  hath  sent  me,  even 
so  send  I  you."  It  would  seem,  indeed,  to  be  conveyed 
with  an  even  increased  effectiveness  due  to  the  com- 
pleteness of  the  Lord's  own  personal  work  :  "  He  that 
believeth  on  me,  the  works  that  I  do  shall  he  do  also ; 
and  greater  works  than  these  shall  he  do ;  because  I  go 
unto  the  Father."  But  however  entirely  the  Master's 
mission  be  handed  on  to  others,  his  personal  inherent 
authority  can  pass  to  no  one.  It  rests  upon  what  he  is 
in  himself,  the  very  God.  Now,  as  before,  it  is  true  : 
"  Never  man  so  spake."  It  follows  that,  since  his 
'  Luke  V.  5  ;  J<jhn  vi.  68  ;  Matt.  xvi.  i6. 


The  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrine  1 1 

authority  in  its  entirety  is  incommunicable,  nothing  can 
be  added  to  his  teaching.  Others  may  teach  with  vary- 
ing authority  where  he  has  been  silent,  but  their  teaching 
is  their  own,  not  the  Lord's.  St.  Paul,  for  example,  care- 
fully distinguishes  between  what  he  teaches  by  his  own 
authority  as  a  ruler  of  the  Church,  and  what  he  delivers 
as  taught  by  the  Lord  himself.  The  total  sum  of 
Christian  doctrine  is  contained  in  what  the  Master 
himself  taught.^ 

To  what  then  serves  the  authority  conveyed  by  com- 
mission to  the  Apostles?  -They  were  not  to  declare  new 
truths  ;  they  were  appointed  to  be  witnesses,  testifying  to 
the  teaching  of  the  Lord.  They  were  the  founders  of  a 
tradition  ;  that  is  to  say,  they  received  something  which 
they  handed  on  to  others.  This  idea  is  found  everywhere 
in  the  writings  of  the  New  Testament.  "  That  which  was 
from  the  beginning,"  says  St.  John,  with  characteristic 
iteration,  '•  that  which  we  have  heard,  that  which  we  have 
seen  with  our  eyes,  that  which  we  beheld,  and  our  hands 
handled,  concerning  the  Word  of  life  ;  that  which  we  have 
seen  and  heard  declare  we  unto  you  also."  The  writer  of 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  defines  his  own  place  in  the 
line  of  tradition  ;  he  has  received  the  teaching  of  salvation, 
"  which  having  at  the  first  been  spoken  through  the  Lord, 
was  confirmed  unto  us  by  them  that  heard."  St.  Paul 
himself  in  one  place  speaks  of  his  gospel  as  given  in  this 
way  :  "  I  delivered  unto  you  first  of  all  that  which  also  I  re- 
ceived." Elsewhere  he  speaks  of  it  as  given  him  directly  : 
"  By  revelation  was  made  known  unto  me  the  mystery  .  .  . 
which  in  other  generations  was  not  made  known  unto 
the  sons  of  men,  as  it  hath  now  been  revealed  unto  his 
holy  apostles  and  prophets  in  the  Spirit."  But  in  this  he 
is  only  putting  himself  on  the  level  of  the  other  Apostles  ; 

'  John  XX    21  ;  xiv.  12  ;  vii.  46;    I  Cur.  vii.  10-12,  25,  40. 


12  TJie  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

his  gospel,  he  writes  to  the  Galatians,  was  not  after  man  : 
"  For  neither  did  I  receive  it  from  man,  nor  was  I  taught 
it,  but  it  came  to  me  through  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ." 
The  true  meaning  of  this  stands  forth  in  his  emj)hatic 
claim  to  have  seen  the  Lord,  like  the  rest,  though  as  one 
horn  out  of  due  time  :  "  Am  I  not  an  Apostle?  Have  I 
not  seen  Jesus  our  Lord  ? "  Like  the  rest,  he  had 
received  and  was  handing  on  to  others,  not  a  separate 
and  personal  revelation  from  God,  but  the  teaching  of 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  The  nearest  approach  to  a  larger 
claim  is  found  in  what  St.  Paul  writes  to  the  Corinthians 
about  the  hidden  wisdom :  "  The  things  of  God  none 
knoweth,  save  the  Spirit  of  God.  But  we  received,  not 
the  spirit  of  the  world,  but  the  Spirit  which  is  of  God  ; 
that  wc  might  know  the  things  that  are  freely  given  to  us 
by  God."     This  needs  consideration.' 

The  Apostles  were  not  only  the  founders  of  a  tradition  ; 
they  were  also  its  guardians.  In  this  capacity  they  had 
the  special  support  of  the  Holy  Si)irit.  The  promise  was, 
"  He  shall  teach  you  all  things,  and  bring  to  your  re- 
membrance all  that  I  said  unto  you."  The  work  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  here  clearly  stated  ;  he  was  not  to  teach 
the  Apostles  new  truths,  but  was  to  inform  them  by 
stirring  and  strengthening  their  memory  of  what  the 
Master  himself  had  taught.  He  was  to  guard  them 
against  the  loss  of  that  which  was  committed  to  them. 
But  this  function  of  guardianship  was  needed  for  all  time. 
How  should  the  purity  of  the  tradition  be  secured  when 
the  Apostles  were  passed  away  ?  They  committed  to 
writing  a  record  of  the  Lord's  teaching.  V>\xi  a  written 
record  may  be  corrupted,  either  by  falsification  or  through 
being  overlaid  by  sinirious  interpretation.     This  was  to 

'  I  John  i.  1-3;  Hcb.  ii.  3;  i  Cor.  xv.  3:  Kph.  iii.  3-5; 
Gal.  i.  12  ;   I  Cor.  ix.  I  ;  ii.  U-12. 


TJie  Nature  of  Cliristian  Doctrine  i  3 

be  guarded  against.  The  tradition,  therefore,  and  tlie 
keeping  of  the  sacred  books,  was  committed  to  a  society, 
the  Church,  the  society  of  believers,  which  is  "  the  pillar 
and  ground  of  the  truth."  The  commission  of  the 
Apostles,  not  indeed  as  the  founders,  but  as  the  guardians, 
of  the  Christian  tradition,  is  continued  in  the  Church. 
The  one  Body  is  illuminated  by  the  One  Spirit  for  the 
performance  of  this  work,  and  such  illumination  is 
sufficient  to  account  for  the  exalted  language  in  which  St. 
Paul  speaks  of  the  spiritual  discernment  or  interpretation 
of  spiritual  things.  The-  Church  is  the  guardian  of 
Christian  doctrine.  The  function  of  the  Church  is  not 
to  receive  new  revelations,  but  to  keep  intact  the  faith 
once  for  all  delivered  unto  the  saints,  to  guard  the  sacred 
writings,  and  to  secure  them  against  false  interpretation. 
For  this  end  the  Church  has  authority  in  controversies  of 
faith,  and  is  able  to  condemn  new  teaching  as  contrary 
to  that  which  has  been  received.  But  as  it  was  with  the 
Apostles,  so  it  is  now  ;  the  Church  is  not  an  original 
teacher,  but  a  witness  to  the  teaching  of  the  Master.^ 

Christian  doctrine  then  is  received  as  taught  by  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  the  revelation  of  what  God 
wills  us  to  know  about  himself  and  our  relation  to  him. 
A  truth  is  said  to  be  revealed  when  it  is  made  known  by 
one  who  formerly  held  it  secret.  There  are  certain  truths 
which  are  naturally  held  secret  from  men,  because  there 
are  no  means  ordinarily  available  for  discovering  them. 
Not  all  that  may  be  known  of  God  is  of  this  kind.  It  is 
not  indeed  possible  to  prove  by  scientific  demonstration 
even  the  existence  of  God ;  from  this  point  of  view  it 
could  only  be  said  at  the  utmost  that  if  there  were  no 
God  the  universe  would  be  an  insoluble  riddle.     But  if 

'  John  xiv.  26  ;  I  Tim.  iii.  15  ;  Jude  3.  Compare  i  Tim.  vi. 
20  ;  2  Tim.  i.  13,  14. 


14  Tlie  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

there  is  no  scientific  proof,  there  is  moral  proof  in  abun- 
dance ;  and  moral  proof,  involving  moral  certainty,  is  that 
on  which  men  rely  in  most  activities  of  life.  Such  proof 
there  is  not  merely  of  the  existence  of  God,  but  of  much 
that  concerns  our  relation  to  him.  "  The  invisible  things 
of  him,"  says  St.  Paul,  "  since  the  creation  of  the  world 
are  clearly  seen,  being  perceived  through  the  things  that 
are  made,  even  his  everlasting  power  and  divinity." 
From  this  knowledge  may  be  derived  the  sense  of  obliga- 
tion, which  is  the  foundation  of  religion  ;  those  who 
have  no  other  knowledge  of  God  but  this  are  still 
without  excuse,  says  the  Apostle,  if,  knowing  God,  they 
glorify  him  not  as  God.^  There  is  therefore  a  true 
Natural  Religion,  the  truths  of  which,  as  already  noted, 
are  in  fact  received  for  the  most  part  by  human  tradition. 
For  these  truths  no  revelation  is  needed ;  the  teaching  of 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  takes  them  for  granted,  and  doing 
so  confirms  our  belief  in  them,  and  clears  away  doubts 
and  i)Ossible  misunderstandings. 

Other  truths  there  are  which  our  natural  powers,  at  all 
events  as  now  developed,  are  incapable  of  discovering. 
These  are  the  proper  subject  of  Revelation.  But  even 
here  there  are  many  things  which  were  not  made  known 
for  the  first  time  by  the  teaching  of  the  Lord  Jesus  ('hrist. 
Revelation  had  begun  from  the  earliest  age  of  human 
history.  Its  first  origin  is  lost  in  the  dimness  of  those 
periods  of  which  the  writings  of  the  Old  Testament  give 
us  only  fragmentary  and  mysterious  records.  Revealed 
Religion,  like  Natural  Religion,  became  a  tradition, 
vaguely  spread  throughout  the  world,  guarded  with 
jealous  care  in  one  family  or  nation,  ^^'ithin  these 
narrow  limits  there  was  a  growing  revelation.  To  his 
chosen  people  God  made  himself  known  by  degrees, 
'  Rom.  i.  20,  21. 


TJie  Nature  of  CJn-istian  Doctriuc  1 5 

suggesting  always  a  fulness  of  knowledge  to  be  granted 
in  the  future.  That  full  knowledge  was  given  by  the 
teaching  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  The  whole  course  of 
revelation  is  summed  up  in  the  opening  words  of  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  :  "  God,  having  of  old  time 
spoken  unto  the  fathers  in  the  prophets  by  divers  portions 
and  in  divers  manners,  hath  at  the  end  of  these  days 
spoken  unto  us  in  his  Son," 

These  truths  of  the  older  revelation  are  taken  for 
granted  in  the  teaching  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  just  as 
are  the  truths  of  Natural  Religion.  But  imperfect  know- 
ledge is  misleading  as  well  as  insufficient,  especially  when 
it  is  knowledge  artificially  conveyed  of  things  not  funda- 
mentally understood.  The  teaching  of  the  Old  Testament 
is  therefore  not  only  supplemented  in  the  New ;  it  is  in 
a  way  corr-ected.  Our  Lord  very  often  seemed  to  men 
to  be  contradicting  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  He  ex- 
plained that  he  was  not  contradicting  but  fulfilling  them. 
In  doing  this,  in  filling  up  the  imperfect  outline  of  truth 
which  they  presented,  he  had  frequent  occasion  to  correct 
the  impression  which  an  incomplete  revelation  had 
inevitably  made  upon  men's  minds  and  upon  human 
traditions.' 

Christian  doctrine  then,  or  the  teaching  of  Christ, 
contains  three  elements.  It  assumes  and  enforces  the 
truths  of  Natural  Religion.  It  assumes  the  truths 
formerly  revealed,  as  recorded  in  the  Old  Testament, 
correcting  erroneous  impressions  due  to  their  incom- 
pleteness. It  sets  forth  new  truths  revealed  by  the 
Incarnate  Word  himself. 

Revelation  is  now  complete.  \Ve  cannot  conceive 
any  revelation  of  the  truth  of  God  more  perfect  than 
that  which  is  made  by  him  who  is  the  "  very  image  of  his 
'  See  especially  Malt.  v.  17-48. 


1 6  TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Substance."  This  consideration  would  not  exclude  the 
possibility  of  a  continuous  and  growing  revelation  by  the 
Lord  himself  to  the  Church,  or  to  specially  favoured 
persons  for  the  benefit  of  the  Church.  Revelations  of 
this  kind,  made  after  the  Ascension,  are  recorded  in  the 
exceptional  cases  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  John.  When  we 
say  that  revelation  is  complete,  we  do  not  mean  that  all 
possible  knowledge  of  God  is  given  to  men,  but  only 
that  all  knowledge  is  given  which  God  wills  them  to 
have.  It  is  conceivable  that  in  the  course  of  ages 
circumstances  might  arise  in  which  God  would  will  that 
men  should  have  a  larger  knowledge,  and  so  would 
make  a  further  revelation.  But  such  revelation  would 
require  attestation  as  strong  as  that  furnished  to  the 
original  gospel  by  the  personal  character  and  teaching 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Nothing  of  the  kind  has 
been.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are  many  pretended 
revelations  which  are  not  so  attested  ;  and  what  is  of 
the  greatest  significance,  men  were  specially  warned  by 
the  original  deliverers  of  the  gospel  tradition  that  such 
would  be  the  case.  They  were  told  to  be  on  their 
guard  against  "  false  Christs  and  false  prophets ; " 
against  the  preaching  of  any  other  gospel,  even  by  an 
angel  from  heaven.  There  is,  on  the  other  hand,  no 
suggestion  of  any  future  revelation  which  should  be 
genuine.  The  revelations  of  the  Old  Testament  con- 
tinually look  forward  to  a  future  and  more  perfect 
revelation  completing  them.  There  is  nothing  of  the 
kind  in  the  New  Testament.  It  is  therefore  in  the 
highest  degree  probable  that  in  the  revelation  of  the 
gospel  we  have  the  sum  of  what  God  wills  us  to  know 
about  Himself  while  the  world  stands.^ 

'   Heb.  i.   3;   Matt.    xxiv.    24;    Gal.   i.  8.     Job.  Damasc,  De 
Orthod.   Fide,  i.   I  :  IIoi'to  to.  irapaStSoutva  riixiv  Sid  re  vofxov  kcH 


TJie  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrine  17 

As  the  revelation  of  the  gospel  is  complete,  so  also 
it  is  exclusive.  It  is  the  revelation  of  things  naturally 
secret,  which  we  cannot  discover  by  ourselves,  but  which 
God  wills  us  to  know.  It  is  therefore  exclusively  con- 
fined to  these  things.  God  does  not  reveal  what  he 
intends  us  to  find  out  by  our  natural  powers.  The  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  did  not  enlighten  men's  ignorance  at  large, 
but  only  in  regard  to  those  matters  about  which  he 
willed  to  enlighten  them.  He  had,  however,  to  use  their 
language,  to  live  among  them  and  share  their  experiences. 
He  had  to  speak  of  many  things  about  which  they  were 
ignorant  or  misinformed,  and  in  doing  so  he  made  use  of 
their  common  expressions.  This  is  fully  understood  in 
regard  to  matters  of  natural  science.  He  did  not  correct 
erroneous  opinions ;  he  himself  used  the  inaccurate 
language  of  common  life.  It  is  not  so  clearly  under- 
stood in  regard  to  some  matters  which  come  near  to  the 
actual  substance  of  his  teaching.  It  was,  for  example, 
a  part  of  his  teaching  to  confirm  the  revelations  of  the 
Old  Testament,  which  he  did  by  referring  to  the  Holy 
Scriptures  as  the  genuine  Word  of  God ;  but  it  was  no 
part  of  his  teaching  to  clear  up  questions  about  the 
human  authorship  of  these  books.  He  therefore  spoke 
of  them  in  this  respect  according  to  the  common  usage 
of  the  time.  A  more  difficult  question  is  raised  by  his 
use  of  the  common  language  about  the  souls  of  the 
departed,  as  in  the  parable  of  I^azarus.  It  is  hard  to 
say  how  much  or  how  little  he  willed  to  reveal  about 
the  secrets  of  death,  and  therefore  we  cannot  say  how  far 
his  use  of  such  language  may  be  taken  to  confirm  the 

TrpocpYTiiv  Kal  airocnSKoov  Kol  (vayye\i(rTcov  5ex"l^^^'^  "''*'  yivcixTKOjxiv  koX 
(T(po/xiv,  ovSev  irepaiTfpoo  tovtoov  tiri^TjTOvvTes  .  .  ,  us  ovv  irdvTa 
elScos  [6  0et)s]  Kal  rh  (TVfKpipov  (KacTTCfi  Trpo^r^Govfjuvos,  omp  (Tvvi(pepiv 
Tjfjuv  yvwvai  av(Ka.\v^(V,  o-nep  Se  ovk  eSvydfMtda  (pfpdv  OTreffiajTrTjcre, 

C 


1 8  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

ideas  which  it  represents.  In  such  cases  our  attitude 
should  be  one  of  reverent  and  prudent  reserve.  We 
may,  however,  be  confident  of  this — that  in  a  matter  so 
secret  and  of  so  great  moment,  our  Lord  would  not  give 
even  apparent  sanction  to  an  opinion  seriously  conflicting 
with  the  truth. ^ 

From  the  completeness  and  exclusiveness  of  the 
revelation  there  follow  two  consequences.  It  follows, 
in  the  first  place,  that  in  the  Church  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment we  are  not  to  look  for  that  continuous  and  pro- 
gressive revelation  which  marks  the  history  of  the  Old 
Testament.  The  other  consequence  is  that  we  must 
look  for  a  continuous  and  progressive  interpretation  of 
what  is  revealed.  The  whole  revealed  truth  of  God  was 
delivered  to  men  whose  understanding  was  imperfectly 
prepared  for  its  apprehension.  It  was  given  in  a  form 
suited  to  their  circumstances,  easy  to  be  retained  in 
memory  and  tradition ;  its  whole  content  was  not  im- 
mediately understood.  Some  parts  of  our  Lord's  teaching 
were  delivered  in  a  form  seemingly  intended  for  the  time 
to  be  hard  of  understanding.  Interpretation  is  necessary 
unless  the  teaching  is  to  be  unmeaning,  but  until  questions 
are  raised  there  is  no  occasion  for  precise  definition. 
Questions  of  three  kinds  may  arise :  questions  about 
matters  bordering  on  revealed  truth,  but  not  actually 
included ;  questions  of  inclusion  or  exclusion,  whether 
a  thing  incidentally  said  by  the  Lord  is  a  proper 
integral  part  of  his  teaching ;  questions  concerning  the 
interpretation  of  what  he  undoubtedly  taught.  Questions 
of  the  first  kind  cannot  be  answered  for  lack  of  material ; 
they  must  remain  questions  only.  Those  of  the  second  kind 
must  often  be  insoluble.     The  questions  of  interpretation 

'  See  the  interesting  discussion  in  Maldonatus,  on  Luke  xvi.,  uf 
the  question  whether  the  parable  be  history  or  allegory. 


The  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrine  19 

are  the  most  important,  and  they  cannot  be  held  inso- 
luble, for  it  would  be  irrational  to  suppose  that  God 
has  revealed  himself  to  us  in  riddles  that  have  no  answer. 
But  revelation,  being  of  things  naturally  secret,  can  be 
illustrated  only  by  revelation.  One  revealed  truth  can 
be  satisfactorily  interpreted  only  by  comparison  with 
another  revealed  truth.  The  comparison  is  compelled 
by  questioning.  The  questioning  is  due  to  partial  under- 
standing. Such  partial  understanding,  when  it  leads  to 
obstinate  division  of  opinion,  is  what  we  call  heresy  ;  the 
part  played  by  heresy  in  the  order  of  Divine  providence 
is  to  compel  questioning  and  a  clearer  apprehension  of 
the  truth.' 

When  questions  arise  it  is  the  function  of  the  Church, 
as  having  authority  in  controversies  of  faith,  to  answer 
them.  The  answer  is  given,  not  by  any  original  teaching, 
for  that  would  imply  a  new  revelation,  but  by  a  declaration 
of  the  teaching  on  the  subject  current  everywhere  in  the 
Church.  This  can  be  determined  only  by  a  comparison 
of  traditions.  At  times  this  is  easily  and  readily  done  ; 
a  novel  interpretation,  unheard  of  anywhere  in  the  past, 
stands  condemned  on  the  ground  of  its  novelty.  At 
other  times  the  process  of  determination  is  difficult,  or  not 
readily  undertaken.  It  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  any 
easy  method  is  provided  for  promptly  determining  such 
questions.  There  may  be  long  delay ;  but  when  once 
the  answer  is  made  and  established,  there  is  a  dcfinitio)i 

'  Compare  Mark  iv.  ii,  12  and  parallel  passages  with  Luke  ix.  45, 
where  much  turns  on  the  question  whether  the  conjunction  'Lva.  ex- 
presses purpose  or  consequence.  It  seems  probable  that  in  the 
former  passage  a  consequence  is  intended,  in  the  latter  a  purpose. 
See  also  l  Cor.  xi.  19,  "There  must  be  also  heresies  among  you, 
that  they  which  are  approved  may  be  made  manifest  among  you  ;  " 
and  TertuUian's  hard  and  fierce  comment,  De  Praescr.,  c.  1-3. 


20  TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

of  faitJi,  which  becomes  an  hitegral  part  of  Christian 
doctrine,  not  as  a  new  tiaith,  but  as  the  settled  inter- 
pretation of  what  was  taught  from  the  beginning. 

The  teaching  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  being  a  complete 
revelation,  the  record  of  it  also  must  be  complete.  If 
anything  originally  unrecorded  were  afterwards  recovered, 
this  could  only  be  by  a  fresh  revelation.  How  then  was 
it  recorded  ?  It  was  stored  up  exclusively  in  the  memory 
of  those  who  received  it.  There  is  perhaps  in  St.  Luke's 
Gospel  a  trace  of  documents  relating  to  our  Lord's  birth 
written  at  the  time  of  the  events,  but  there  is  no  reason 
to  suppose  that  any  account  of  his  life  and  teaching  was 
committed  to  writing  until  after  the  lapse  of  many  years. 
His  doctrine  had  sunk  into  the  minds  of  those  whom  he 
taught,  and  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost  was  afterwards 
upon  them  to  rouse  and  sustain  their  remembrance. 
What  they  had  received  by  word  of  mouth  they  delivered 
in  the  same  way.  The  teaching  of  the  Master  was  thus 
communicated  to  the  growing  body  of  disciples  b}- 
numerous  interlacing  lines  of  oral  tradition.  No  surer 
means  could  be  devised  for  preserving  the  record  intact. 
Any  variations  of  teaching,  due  to  individual  perversity 
or  ignorance,  were  bound  to  come  into  collision  with 
sounder  and  purer  traditions.  The  Epistles  of  St.  Paul 
abound  with  illustrations  of  this.  We  see  there  how 
jealously  St.  Paul  himself  was  watched,  and  how  ready 
he  was  in  his  turn  to  check  the  hesitations  even  of  his 
fellow-apostles.  By  these  means,  in  the  course  of  some 
years,  a  solid  tradition  of  doctrine  was  formed  in  the 
Christian  society.  Tradition  is  to  a  society  what  habit  is  to 
the  individual.  It  cannot  be  set  aside  without  a  conscious 
effort.  It  is  subject  however,  like  habit,  to  subtle  and 
imperceptible  changes,  and  we  should  have  no  guarantee 
for  the  permanence  of  the  Christian  tradition,  were  it  not 


The  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrine 


21 


for  the  perpetual  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  This 
guidance  was  for  the  whole  society.  St.  Paul  couples  the 
one  Body  and  the  one  Spirit  with  the  one  Faith  and  the 
one  Hope  of  our  Christian  calling.  The  social  tradition 
was  all-powerful  to  check  individual  variation,  and  was 
itself  guarded  by  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit.' 

Not  until  the  Christian  tradition  was  firmly  established 
is  there  any  trace  of  its  being  recorded  in  writing.  Nor 
even  then  was  any  systematic  record  made.  There  was 
a  "  pattern  of  sound  words  "  which  Timothy  was  charged 
by  St.  Paul  to  hold  in  faith  and  love,  but  the  earnest- 
ness with  which  he  was  urged  to  guard  the  deposit 
shows  that  reliance  was  put  on  oral  tradition  and  memory. 
The  writings  of  the  Apostles  are  local  and  occasional ; 
they  assume  the  teaching  which  they  illustrate.  Col- 
lections were  made  by  individual  writers  of  the  sayings 
and  doings  of  the  Lord ;  they  were  numerous,  as  we 
know  from  the  preface  to  St.  Luke's  Gospel ;  they  were 
but  fragmentary,  as  the  concluding  words  of  St.  John's 
Gospel  aver.  Of  these  collections  we  retain  four,  and 
some  doubtful  fragments  of  others.  There  is  no  trace  of 
any  orderly  and  systematic  reduction  to  writing  of  the 
whole  Christian  tradition. - 

In  the  course  of  time  however  the  Christian  writings 
acquired  a  new  importance.  They  were  documents. 
The  record  of  the  teaching  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is 
matter  of  history,  and  for  history  the  importance  of 
documentary  evidence  can  hardly  be  exaggerated.  An 
age  which  knew  nothing  of  the  science  of  historical 
criticism  was  nevertheless  led  to  guard  these  documents 
with  jealous  care.  They  were  not  a  complete  record, 
but  they  were  invaluable  as  means  of  testing  the  accurate 

'  Eph.  iv.  4,  5.  ■ 

-  2  Tim.  i.  13,   14.     Compare  i  Tim.  vi.  3,  20, 


22  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

persistence  of  the  tradition  received.  Tliere  was  a  nega- 
tive test.  In  the  course  of  his  controversy  about  the 
rebaptism  of  heretics  St.  Cyprian  put  the  question  whether 
it  was  written  in  the  Gospels,  the  Epistles,  or  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles,  that  heretics  should  be  received  without 
baptism ;  if  it  w^ere  so,  then  the  authority  of  the  written 
record  must  prevail ;  if  not,  then  the  custom  of  the 
Church  to  the  contrary  must  be  upheld.  There  was  also 
a  positive  test.  St.  Athanasius  ridiculed  the  eagerness  of 
the  Arians  to  hold  Councils  for  the  discussion  of  doctrine  ; 
the  Holy  Scripture,  he  said,  was  the  surer  test  of  true 
teaching.  TertuUian  indeed  spoke  slightingly  of  the 
appeal  to  Scripture  ;  he  would  rely  rather  on  the  Rule  of 
Faith,  the  oral  teaching  of  the  Church  given  at  baptism. 
But  the  contrary  opinion  prevailed.  It  was  thought  unsafe 
to  press  any  teaching  for  which  support  could  not  be  found 
in  the  sacred  writings.  From  the  fourth  century  onward 
there  was  a  general  adoption  of  the  rule  to  which  the 
English  Church  has  given  emphatic  approval,  that  no  man 
may  be  required  to  believe,  as  necessary  to  salvation, 
anything  which  cannot  be  proved  out  of  Holy  Scripture. 
St.  Athanasius,  after  enumerating  the  books  of  the  Old 
and  New  Testaments,  says,  "  These  are  the  fountains  of 
salvation,  so  that  he  who  thirsts  may  be  satiated  with  the 
oracles  contained  therein  ;  in  these  alone  is  declared  the 
schooling  of  religion  ;  let  no  one  add  hereto  or  take 
aught  herefrom."  The  Church  was  still  the  teacher,  the 
guardian,  the  interpreter  of  the  Christian  tradition,  but 
the  current  record  was  to  be  verified  by  the  documentary 
evidence.  The  infallible  rule  of  faith,  says  Bramhall,  is 
Holy  Scripture  interpreted  by  the  Catholic  Church.' 

'  Cyprian,  Epist.  Ixxiv.  p.  8cx),  ed.  Hartel ;  Athanasius,  Dt 
Syii.  Arim.  et  Sel.,  torn.  i.  p.  873,  ed.  Colon  ;  TertuUian,  De 
Pracscr.,  13-19;  Athanasius,  torn.  ii.  p.  39  ;  Bramhall,  JVorIcs,vo\. 


TJie  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrine  23 

But  what  is  Holy  Scripture  ?  The  books  of  the  New 
Testament  are  no  systematic  record  of  Christian  doctrine, 
complete  and  self-contained.  Neither,  on  the  other  hand, 
are  they  the  only  books  of  the  kind.  Many  others  at  one 
time  existed,  some  few  survive  to  our  day.  Those 
included  in  the  Canon  of  Scripture  seem  on  the  face  of 
things  to  be  arbitrarily  selected.  There  is  no  apparent 
reason  why  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  should  be 
included,  the  Epislle  of  St.  Clement  to  the  Corinthians 
excluded ;  why  two  short  private  letters  of  St.  John  are 
preserved,  while  other  more  public  writings  of  the 
Apostles  are  lost  to  memory ; "  why  four  Gospels  were 
received,  and  the  many  others  of  which  St.  Luke  speaks, 
and  the  Login,  or  collected  sayings  of  the  Lord  current 
in  the  first  age,  were  rejected.  The  Epistle  of  St. 
Barnabas  was  for  a  time  accepted  in  some  places  as 
canonical,  the  Revelation  of  St.  John  was  rejected.  Not 
until  the  end  of  the  fourth  century  were  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament  universally  received  as  we  now  have 
them. 

The  selection  of  these  books  was  the  work  of  the 
Church.  It  was  not  a  conscious  and  deliberate  selec- 
tion made  at  any  set  time.  Of  the  Holy  Scripture, 
as  of  the  whole  sacred  tradition,  the  Church  was  not 
the  originator  but  the  guardian ;  no  book  could  be  raised 
to  this  level  or  degraded  at  the  arbitrary  bidding  of 
ecclesiastical  authority.  The  Church  merely  noted  and 
recorded  the  fact  that  certain  books  had  been  received  as 
genuine  records.  The  Canon  was  the  result  of  con- 
current traditions  in  all  parts  of  the   Church.     A  book 

ii.  p.  22,  ed.  i8|2.  A  long  list  of  quotations  from  tlie  Fathers  on 
this  head  will  be  found  in  Goode's  Divine  Ride  of  Faith  and  Practice, 
vol.  iii.  pp.  29-211.  Compare  Pusey,  Eirmicon,  part  i.  pp. 
336-351- 


24  rhc  Elevieits  of  Christian  Doctrine 

received  in  some  few  places  but  rejected  by  the  Church 
at  large  was  put  aside  for  lack  of  this  concurrent 
testimony.  A  book  ignored  in  one  or  two  places  only 
was  eventually  received  everywhere  on  the  strength  of 
the  general  tradition.  The  testimony  of  the  Church  is 
that  these  books  do  as  a  matter  of  fact  contain  the 
teaching  of  the  Lord  himself,  as  delivered  by  those  who 
w'ere  his  eye-witnesses  from  the  beginning. 

This  is  in  the  first  place  purely  a  matter  of  historical 
fact.  As  so  regarded,  the  testimony  of  tradition  might 
conceivably  be  overthrown  by  other  evidence.  The 
continuous  tradition  of  a  society  like  the  Christian  Church 
will  carry  great  weight  with  all  reasonable  men,  but  it 
cannot  amount  to  absolutely  conclusive  evidence.  The 
writings  of  the  New  Testament  are  therefore  tested  by 
scholarship  and  criticism,  like  any  other  books.  If  when 
so  tested  they  were  found  to  be  altogether  different  from 
what  they  profess  to  be,  if  they  proved  to  be  forgeries 
or  late  compilations  of  doubtful  legends,  then  the 
foundations  would  indeed  be  cast  down ;  the  Church 
would  be  shown  to  have  been  a  faithless  or  incompetent 
guardian  of  tradition,  and  we  should  have  no  certain 
knowledge  about  any  teaching  of  our  Master.  But  in 
fact  the  most  rigid  and  unsparing  criticism  has  served 
only  to  establish  in  the  main  the  authenticity  of  the  books, 
and  the  accuracy  of  the  tradition  by  which  we  have 
received  them.  This  being  so  far  established,  we  may 
accept  that  tradition  with  the  more  confidence  where 
verification  is  doubtful. 

In  this  way  the  genuineness  of  the  tradition  is 
vindicated  even  to  those  that  are  without.  But  for  him 
who  has  once  adopted  the  standpoint  of  the  disciple, 
there  is  much  stronger  confirmation.  Accepting  the 
teaching  and  the  promises  of  the  Lord,  lie  has  an  over- 


TJie  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrine  25 

powering  certainty  that  what  the  Lord  committed  to  the 
Apostles  and  to  his  Church  will  be  preserved ;  he  has  the 
assurance  of  the  continual  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Nor  is  this  to  argue  in  a  circle,  as  if  we  grounded  the 
authority  of  the  Church  on  the  testimony  of  Scripture, 
and  the  authenticity  of  Scripture  on  the  testimony  of  the 
Church.  It  is  true,  as  Hooker  says,  that  "  the  first 
outward  motive  leading  men  so  to  esteem  of  the 
Scripture  is  the  authority  of  God's  Church."  But,  as  he 
shows,  the  testimony  of  the  Church  is  subject  to  the 
most  searching  examination,  and  when  this  examination 
leaves  the  elementary  facts  of  the  record  undisturbed, 
those  facts  thus  guaranteed  involve  as  a  necessary 
consequence  the  truth  of  the  Divine  guidance  in  which 
we  trust.  It  is  now  as  it  was  in  our  Lord's  own  time.  A 
few  simple  facts  are  sufficient  to  confirm  us  in  the 
position  of  disciples;  then  as  disciples  we  receive  the 
rest  of  the  teaching  without  demur.' 

A  disciple,  then,  receives  the  Holy  Scriptures  first  and 
last  on  the  authority  of  the  Church.  It  is  the  written 
record  of  the  sacred  tradition  which  the  Church  is  to 
guard.  Is  this  record  finally  closed  ?  There  is  no 
question  that  the  record  of  the  Christian  revelation, 
written  or  unwritten,  was  from  the  first  complete ; 
nothing  could  be  added  without  further  revelation.  But 
it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  the  record,  as  written, 
should  be  closed  at  any  time.  There  are  two  opinions 
on  this  subject.  The  one  has  been  expressed  emphati- 
cally by  the  Russian  theologian  Khomiakoff :  "  The 
collection  of  Old  and  New  Testament  books,  which  the 
Church  acknowledges  as  hers,  are  called  by  tlie  name  of 
Holy  Scripture.  But  there  are  no  limits  to  Scripture  ; 
for  every  writing  which  the  Church  acknowledges  as  hers 

'  Hooker,  Eccl.  Pol.,  iii.  S.  14,  vol.  i.  p.  376. 


26  TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

is  Holy  Scripture.  Such  pre-eminently  are  the  Creeds  of 
the  General  Councils,  and  especially  the  Niceno-Con- 
stantinopolitan  Creed.  AA'herefore  the  writing  of  Holy 
Scripture  has  gone  on  up  to  our  day,  and,  if  God  pleases, 
yet  more  will  be  written."  '  The  contrary  opinion  is 
that  Holy  Scripture  is  to  be  regarded  exclusively  as  a 
contemporaneous  record  of  the  teaching  of  our  Lord,  de- 
livered by  the  Apostles,  and  those  who  were  eye-witnesses 
of  the  ^Vord.  According  to  this  opinion  the  Canon  of 
Scripture  is  necessarily  closed  with  the  first  age  of  the 
Church ;  and  if  nothing  may  be  imposed  on  men  as 
matter  of  faith  but  what  is  supported  by  the  evidence 
of  the  written  word,  it  will  follow  that  even  the  Creeds 
themselves  need  the  support  of  such  testimony. 

The  difference  between  these  two  opinions  is  less  in 
reality  than  in  seeming.  For,  on  the  one  hand,  since  it 
is  held  that  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  and  the 
Creeds  are  both  alike  transcripts  of  the  one  tradition, 
the  doctrine  delivered  by  the  Lord  to  his  Apostles,  they 
are  bound  to  be  in  agreement;  if  they  were  in  the 
smallest  degree  in  conflict,  the  basis  of  our  faith  would 
be  overthrown.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  the  Creeds  are 
received  as  an  authentic  interpretation  of  Scripture, 
delivered  by  the  authority  of  the  Church,  which  has 
jealously  guarded  the  doctrine  received  from  the  begin- 
ning. The  difference  is  one  of  definition.  If  Holy 
Scripture  be  taken  to  mean  any  and  every  authentic 
record  in  writing  of  the  substance  of  the  Christian 
revelation,  then  the  Creeds  must  be  included  ;  if  it  be 
taken  to  mean  contemporaneous  record  only,  they  are 
excluded.  According  to  both  opinions  they  are  an 
authentic  record,  but  in  tlie  one  case  they  are  reckoned 
to  have  authority  at  first  hand,  in  the  other  case  they 
*  Rirkbeck,  Russia  and  the  English  Church,  vol.  i.  p.  200. 


T)ie  Nature  of  Christian  Doctrine  27 

have  authority  at  second  hand.  In  the  former  case 
they  are  taken  as  evidence  for  the  facts,  in  the  latter 
case  they  are  evidence  only  for  the  meaning  of  the  facts. 
In  the  English  Church  all  authorized  teachers  are 
required  to  conform  to  the  latter  opinion.^ 

It  remains  to  summarize  what  has  thus  far  heen  said. 

(i.)  Christian  doctrine  is  that  which  is  taught  by  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  about  the  hidden  things  of  God. 

(ii.)  It  is  received  by  the  faith  of  the  disciple,  who 
commits  himself  with  a  confidence  absolute,  though  not 
blind  or  unreasoning,  to  the  teaching  of  the  Master. 
What  the  Master  has  actually  taught  has  to  be  ascertained 
by  historical  evidence,  of  which  the  common  belief  of 
Christendom  forms  the  chief  element.  When  once  it 
is  ascertained,  the  disciple  assents  to  it  with  entire 
assurance. 

(iii.)  He  does  this  on  the  ground  of  the  authority  of  the 
Master,  whom  he  acknowledges  to  be  sent  from  God, 
and  thereafter  learns  to  be  none  other  than  himself  God 
of  God.  In  a  secondary  sense  he  receives  the  doctrine 
on  the  authority  of  the  Church,  but  only  as  the  faithful 
guardian,  transmitter,  and  interpreter  of  the  Lord's  teach- 
ing, under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

(iv.)  Christian  doctrine  is  a  revelation  of  truths  which 
could  not  be  naturally  discovered.  It  assumes  the  truths 
of  Natural  Religion,  and  all  other  truths  revealed  by  the 
prophets  of  the  Old  Testament,  corrects  the  imperfections 
of  these,  and  adds  a  fuller  knowledge. 

(v.)  This  revelation  is  complete  and  exclusive.     There 

'  or  llie  Thirty-nine  Articles,  the  Sixth  and  the  Eighth  define 
Holy  Scripture  as  meaning  the  Canonical  books  of  the  Old  and  New 
Testament,  and  affirm  that  the  Creeds  "ought  thoroughly  to  he 
received  and  believed  :  for  they  may  be  proved  by  most  certain 
warrants  of  holy  Scripture." 


28  The  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

is  therefore  no  continuous  or  further  revelation,  but 
there  is  a  progressive  understanding  of  what  is  revealed. 
It  is  the  function  of  the  Church,  under  the  guidance  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  to  watch  this  process,  guarding  the  purity 
of  interpretation,  and  marking  the  result  in  definitions  of 
faith. 

(vi.)  There  is  a  complete  record  of  this  revelation,  con- 
tained from  the  first  in  the  tradition  of  the  Church,  and 
after  a  while  set  down  in  the  sacred  Scriptures  of  the 
New  Testament,  without  the  support  of  which  nothing 
may  be  reckoned  an  essential  part  of  the  doctrine 
necessary  for  salvation.  The  Rule  of  Faith  is  Hoi}- 
Scripture  interpreted  by  the  Church. 

Part  H. — The  Content  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Christian  doctrine  is  directly  concerned  only  with  the 
invisible  things  of  Cod,  made  known  by  revelation. 
But  human  life  is  one  and  indivisible,  as  also  is  the 
human  understanding.  We  cannot  shut  up  our  actions 
or  our  thoughts  into  compartments.  Christian  doctrine 
will  therefore  be  continually  touching  on  things  known 
to  us  by  sense  and  experience  ;  it  may  serve  to  correct 
erroneous  inferences  about  these  very  things ;  it  conveys 
information  about  them  not  otherwise  attainable.  In 
such  cases  we  have  to  distinguish  between  the  facts  dis- 
coverable by  our  natural  powers,  and  the  truths  delivered 
to  us  by  revelation.  These  latter,  by  reason  of  the  way 
in  which  they  are  learnt,  we  call  supernatural  truths. 
They  are  neither  more  nor  less  true,  and  in  themselves 
neither  more  nor  less  certain,  than  the  others.  For  us, 
however,  they  are  at  once  less  certain  and  more  certain  : 
less  certain  in  respect  of  what  Hooker  calls  the  certainty 
of  evidence,  for  there  is  no  evidence  com]\arablc  to  that 


The  Contcjit  of  Christian  Doctrine  29 

of  the  senses  and  the  intellect ;  more  certain,  in  so  far  as 
we  trust  the  Word  of  God  more  entirely  than  our  own 
impressions  and  inferences.  There  cannot  be  conflict 
between  the  two  orders  of  truth,  for  there  is  one  God,  the 
Author  of  nature  and  the  Author  of  revelation.  If  there 
seem  to  be  conflict,  we  have  either  misinterpreted  the 
evidence  of  nature,  misunderstood  what  is  given  by  revela- 
tion, or  drawn  erroneous  inferences  from  the  one  or  the 
other.  The  last  fault  is  perhaps  the  commonest.  It 
usually  involves  the  logical  fallacy  of  arguing  a  dido 
sccundiini  quid  ad  didwn  siiiipUdtcr.  The  truths  of 
revelation  are  stated  secundum  quid,  in  words  which  are 
intended  in  a  certain  limited  sense ;  for  in  speaking  of 
the  invisible  things  of  God  we  are  compelled  to  use  words 
derived  from  our  experience  of  visible  things,  having 
in  fact  none  other.  If  then  we  argue  from  the  words  of 
revelation  without  regard  to  the  limitations  within  which 
they  are  used,  we  may  draw  from  supernatural  truths 
false  inferences  concerning  natural  facts,  or  counter- 
wise.  To  take  a  familiar  example,  the  words  Heaven  and 
Hell  are  names  of  things  naturally  known  to  us — the 
visible  sky  over  our  heads,  and  the  depths  of  the  earth 
under  our  feet.  These  words  are  used  in  revelation  as 
the  names  of  invisible  realities  about  which  are  declared 
supernatural  truths.  If  from  these  supernatural  truths  we 
attempt  to  draw  inferences  about  the  constitution  of  sky 
and  earth,  we  come  into  conflict  with  natural  knowledge. 
If,  on  the  other  hand,  from  our  knowledge  of  earth  and 
sky  we  attempt  to  draw  inferences  about  the  invisible 
realities  of  heaven  and  hell,  we  arrive  at  fantastic  imagi- 
nations, which  may  obscure  and  confuse  the  supernatural 
truth. 

^Ve  must  be  careful  then  how  we  enlarge  the  field  of 
Christian  doctrine  by  uncertain  inferences.     When  terms 


30  TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

of  our  natural  understanding  are  used  to  express  super- 
natural truth,  we  may  be   sure   there  is    some   analogy 
between  the  things  so  named  in  common ;  but  we  must 
not  force  the  analogy.     God  is  spoken  of  in  terms  of 
Fatherhood  and  Sonship ;  there  must  be  some  analogy 
between  the  relation   as  existing   in  the   Godhead  and 
the  relation  familiarly  known  in  human   life.     A  certain 
spiritual   condition    is    spoken   of    as    death ;     it   must 
have  some  analogy  with  that  change  in  the  body  and  its 
functions,  the  name  of  which  it  borrows.     The  analogy 
is  real;    there  is  not  merely  a  superficial  resemblance 
between  two  things  which  leads  to  the  proper  name  of 
the  one  being  improperly  applied  to  the  other.     Know- 
ledge of  God  is  possible  at  all  only  because  of  a  certain 
correspondence  of  our  nature  with  the  Divine  nature,  by 
reason  of  which  we  are  said  to  be  made  in  the  likeness 
of  God.     Our  life  has  some  real  analogy  with  the  life  of 
God,  our  experience  with  God's  working,  our  ideas  with 
his   knowledge.      The   words    therefore   by   which   we 
express  ideas  derived  from  our  experience  of  life  have  a 
certain  fitness  for  the  use  made  of  them  in  revelation. 
They  are  used  in  a  way  not  altogether  arbitrary,    but 
according  with  their  natural  sense,  to  express  the  truths 
supernaturally  made  known  to  us.     But  our  ideas  are  for 
the  most  part  highly  complicated.     The  content  of  the 
idea  of  fatherhood,  for  example,  is  not  easily  determined. 
For  the  simple  acceptance  of  Christian   doctrine,  it  is 
enough  to  know  that  God  is  spoken  of  as  the  Father  in 
a  sense  generally  corresponding  with  that  in  which  we 
speak  of  fatherhood  in  man  ;  for  a  perfect  understanding 
of  revelation,  we  should  need  to  know  precisely  what  are 
the  characteristics  of  fatherhood  in  man  which  so  faith- 
fully represent  what  is  in  God  as  to  make  the  word  suit- 
able for  expressing  the  Divine  relation.     In  ])roportion  to 


TJie  Content  of  Christian  Doctrine  31 

our  ignorance  on  this  head  is  ihe  peril  of  i)ressing  the 
analogy. 

A  faithful  exposition  of  Christian  doctrine  will  proceed 
with  careful  regard  to  these  limitations.  ^Ve  must  con- 
fine ourselves  to  what  is  actually  given  in  revelation, 
together  with  those  few  inferences  which  attain  to  the 
highest  degree  of  certainty.  Other  inferences  may  be 
admitted  in  a  class  apart  as  opinions  more  or  less  pro- 
bable ;  others  again  should  be  marked  for  emphatic 
rejection  as  involving  a  contradiction  with  known  truth. 

We  begin  with  God  himself.  His  being  is  a  truth  of 
natural  religion,  confirmed  by  revelation.  His  attributes, 
clearly  enough  perceived,  as  St.  Paul  says,  through  his 
works  from  the  beginning  of  the  world,  were  revealed  with 
growing  distinctness  under  the  Old  Testament,  and  were 
rather  illustrated  than  declared  by  the  teaching  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  But  revealed  religion  regards  God 
in  particular  as  the  Creator.  By  creating  the  world,  and 
especially  by  creating  spiritual  beings,  God  has  set  up  a 
relation  of  the  creature  to  himself.  It  is  a  subordinate 
relation,  and  the  freedom  of  the  creature  renders  possible 
insubordination.  On  these  three  points,  creation,  free- 
dom, and  insubordination,  some  floating  ideas  of  doubtful 
origin,  partly  true  and  partly  false,  have  permeated  the 
natural  knowledge  of  most  men  ;  they  are  corrected  and 
fixed  by  revelation.  The  conception  of  sin,  and  the 
consciousness  of  a  degraded  or  fallen  state  in  which 
sin,  unnatural  in  itself,  is  become  a  habit  or  second 
nature  to  man,  are  in  like  manner  things  doubtfully 
apprehended  by  natural  religion,  but  openly  declared  by 
revelation. 

From  this  point  we  pass  entirely  beyond  the  limits  of 
natural  knowledge.  By  revelation  we  have  in  the  Old 
Testament  a  promise  of  deliverance  from  this  evil  state, 


32  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

in  the  New  Testament  a  declaration  of  the  manner  of 
deliverance  and  the  assurance  of  its  accomplishment. 
Redemption  by  the  Incarnate  Son  of  God,  the  truth  of 
the  Atonement,  is  the  peculiar  teaching  of  the  gospel. 
We  find,  indeed,  here  and  there  in  mankind  an  ardent 
desire  for  such  deliverance,  a  hope  even,  which  we  may 
possibly  trace  to  a  tradition  of  God's  promise  made  at 
the  beginning  of  revelation  ;  but  this  desire  is  either 
inoperative,  tending  to  despair,  or  else  finds  vent  in 
fantastic  imaginings  of  purification  or  propitiation,  which 
often  run  riotously  counter  to  morality,  and  become  the 
source  of  greater  evils  than  they  were  supposed  to 
remedy.  It  is  natural  that  such  imaginings  should  have 
some  superficial  resemblance  to  the  Christian  religion, 
for  on  the  one  hand  they  come  from  an  eftbrt  of  the  human 
mind  to  compass  that  which  God  effects  in  Jesus  Christ 
according  to  his  own  wisdom,  and  on  the  other  hand  it 
seems  probable  that  God  has  allowed  these  natural 
searchings  to  furnish  materials  for  the  outward  obser- 
vances of  religion.  The  visible  superiority  of  the  true 
religion  is  found  in  the  perfect  harmony  of  Divine  and 
human  action,  of  moral  effort  and  supernatural  aid,  which 
characterizes  the  Christian  doctrine  of  Grace  and  of 
Eternal  Life.  This  doctrine  is  the  necessary  pendant  to 
that  of  the  Incarnation  and  the  Atonement ;  and  taken 
together  these  are  the  core  of  Christian  teaching.  They 
contain  the  essential  truth  of  Redemption. 

But  the  Christian  religion  has  an  outward  presentment. 
The  effect  of  grace  is  the  sanctification  of  the  creature, 
and  of  the  creature  as  made  by  God.  Nature  is  not  to 
be  superseded,  but  filled  with  new  powers,  purified  and 
brought  close  to  God  in  perfect  subordination.  The 
purpose  of  Redemption  is  to  restore  in  man  the  original 
work   of   God.      But    God  made  man  a   social    being, 


TJie  Content  of  Christian  Doctrine  33 

incapable  of  living  his  life  truly  and  fully  in  isolation. 
The  individual  man  is  incomplete  in  himself;  indeed  he 
becomes  himself  only  as  he  finds  his  place  in  social 
organization.' 

The  social  organism  of  mankind  in  the  family  and 
the  state  is  degraded  by  the  Fall  equally  with  the  animal 
and  spiritual  organism  of  the  individual  man.  Restora- 
tion is  therefore  necessary  here  also.  And  as  the  animal 
and  spiritual  organism  is  neither  superseded  nor  merely 
improved  by  the  work  of  Redemption,  but  is  supplemented 
by  new  and  supernatural  powers  bestowed  upon  each 
man,  to  coexist  with  his  natural  powers,  so  a  new  and 
supernatural  bond  of  social  order  is  given  to  mankind, 
which  coexists  with  the  natural  solidarity  of  family  and 
state.  This  supernatural  society  is  the  Christian  Church. 
Until  the  rise  in  modern  times  of  some  counter  opinions, 
all  men  were  agreed,  says  Thorndike,  "  that  the  Church 
is  a  society  of  men  subsisting  by  God's  revealed  will, 
distinct  from  all  other  societies."  There  were  disputes 
about  the  composition  and  constitution  of  the  society, 
but  the  disputes  were  themselves  proofs  of  the  common 
belief  in  the  reality  of  that  about  which  men  debated. 
The  constitution  of  the  Church  is  then  a  matter  of 
revealed  truth.  It  is  the  outward  organization  of  that 
kingdom  of  God  which  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  proclaimed, 
and  in  speaking  the  things  concerning  the  kingdom  he 
revealed  to  the  disciples  all  that  essentially  belongs  to 
the  social  order  of  redeemed  humanity.  This  too  is  a 
part  of  Christian  doctrine. ^ 

It  will    therefore    be    necessary   to    determine   what 

'  This  truth  was  expressed  by  Aristotle  once  for  all  in  the  phrase 
describing  man  as  (^uo-ei  iroXniKhv  ((^ov  (l^o/.,  i.  2). 

-  Thorndike,  Epilogue,  part  i.  p.  5  ( Works,  vol.  ii.  part  i. 
p.  24)  ;  Acts  i.  3. 

D 


34  TJic  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

constitutes  membership  in  the  Church,  and  what  are  the 
relations  of  the  members  to  one  another.  We  must  do 
this  not  by  induction  from  the  existing  practice  of  those 
who  now  claim,  with  whatever  degree  of  right,  the  name 
of  Christian,  but  only  by  study  of  the  actual  teaching  of 
the  Lord,  preserved  in  the  Christian  tradition.  The 
pretensions  of  those  who  call  themselves  Christians  are 
to  be  measured  by  this  standard  ;  they  cannot  make  a 
standard  to  themselves.  The  Church  is  not  a  gathering 
of  individuals  who  make  their  own  laws  of  association  ; 
it  is  a  society  subsisting  by  the  revealed  will  of  God  to 
which  individuals  are  aggregated ;  and  this  aggregation  is 
the  work  of  God.^ 

Social  order  is  impossible  without  duly  appointed 
officers,  exercising  authority.  It  is  therefore  a  matter  of 
Christian  doctrine  to  know  what  is  the  revealed  will  of 
God  in  this  regard ;  how  the  sacred  ministry  of  the 
Church  is  constituted,  and  what  are  its  powers.  It  is 
obvious  that,  according  as  the  Divine  Will  disposed,  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  might  have  ordered  these  matters 
either  generally  or  specifically.  In  the  former  case  all 
the  necessary  powers  of  government  would  be  given  to 
the  Christian  society  at  large,  and  the  details  left  to  the 
ordering  of  sanctified  human  wisdom  within  the  Church  ; 
Christian  doctrine  would  then  be  concerned  only  with 
the  general  powers,  the  details  being  matters  of  history 
and  ecclesiastical  law.  In  the  latter  case  some  at  least 
of  the  details  would  be  ordered  by  revelation,  and  would 
form  part  of  the  Christian  tradition. 

It  is  necessary  then  to  inquire  whicli  of  these  two 
modes  of  institution  was  actually  followed  by  our  Lord. 

'  See  Acts  ii.  41,  47,  where  the  word  TrpoaTidevat  can  bear  no 
other  meaning  than  this.  The  words  nj  e/c/cArjtr/a,  inserted  in  the 
current  text,  are  an  obvious  gloss. 


TJie  Content  of  Christian  Doctrine  35 

We  cannot  say  that  a  clear  and  unmistakable  answer 
to  this  question  is  found  in  the  written  record  of  his 
teaching.  There  are  passages,  indeed,  which  are  com- 
monly quoted  as  signifying  the  express  appointment  of 
a  ministerial  power  and  function  in  the  Church ;  but 
their  exact  purport  is  the  precise  question  in  debate, 
which  therefore  they  cannot  solve.  Men  whose  opinions 
are  not  to  be  ignored  have  pointed  out  that  all  these 
passages  are  patient  of  an  interpretation  which  attaches 
the  powers  there  spoken  of  to  the  Church  at  large, 
without  indicating  even  in  the  broadest  outline  the 
manner  of  their  exercise.^  There  are  solemn  charges 
delivered  by  the  Lord  to  the  Apostles ;  there  is  a  promise 
and  a  grant  of  powers  needed  for  the  fulfilment  of  the 
charge  ;  there  is  a  very  definite  mission — "  As  the  Father 
hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you."  Had  these  words 
the  effect  of  giving  to  the  Apostles  a  magisterial  authority 
in  the  Church,  or  were  they  addressed  to  the  whole 
body  of  believers;  or,  if  to  the  Twelve  alone,  then  to 
them  as  representing  the  whole  body  ?  In  a  word,  were 
the  Twelve  addressed  as  Apostles  or  as  Disciples  ? 

One  of  the  most  unvarying  of  Christian  traditions 
takes  the  words  as  conveying  or  illustrating  a  grant  of 
specific  authority.  The  Lord  committed  to  the  Apostles 
his  flock,  of  which  they  were  to  be  pastors  and  rulers ; 
he  committed  to  them  all  the  nations  of  the  world, 
out  of  which  to  gather  disciples.    By  necessary  inference, 

'  Such  is  the  ground  maintained  in  Dr.  Hort's  lectures  on  T/ie 
Christian  Ecclcsia,  where  the  passages  are  subjected  to  a  searching 
analysis.  Dr.  Hort,  however,  was  deserted  by  his  usual  caution 
when  he  said  (p.  84)  that  there  is  "  no  trace  in  Scripture  of  a  formal 
commission  of  authority  for  government  from  Christ  himself." 
This  positive  denial  seems  hardly  more  justifiable  than  a  positive 
counter-assertion  that  the  passages  in  question  contain  a  clear  and 
unmistakable  record  of  such  a  commission. 


36  Tlic  Elciiicnts  of  Christian  Doctriiw 

and  probably  in  accordance  with  explicit  instructions, 
they  were  to  take  to  themselves  others  who  should  aid 
them  while  they  lived,  and  afterwards  succeed  to  their 
authority.  Thus  the  sacred  ministry  of  the  Church  was 
directly  instituted  by  the  Lord  himself.  So  says  the 
Christian  tradition.  At  various  times  there  have  been 
sharp  controversies  about  the  nature  of  the  powers  thus 
given,  but  the  dispute  always  presupposes  the  reality  of 
the  gift.  Even  in  the  sixteenth  century,  those  who  broke 
loose  from  the  received  order  of  the  Church  and  were  in 
open  revolt  against  the  prelacy  delivered  this  same  tradi- 
tion as  they  had  received  it.  There  was  bold  speculation, 
only  in  part  new,  as  to  the  mode  of  appointment  to  the 
sacred  ministry,  but  the  institution  itself  was  treated  as 
an  integral  part  of  the  Christian  deposit.  The  Protestant 
and  Reformed  Confessions  are  here  agreed.  "  The 
power  of  the  keys,  or  of  l)ishops,"  says  the  Confession 
of  Augsburg,  "  according  to  the  gospel  is  a  power  or 
mandate  of  God  to  preach  the  gospel,  to  remit  and 
retain  sins,  and  to  administer  the  sacraments."  The 
Saxon  Confession,  presented  to  the  Council  of  Trent, 
attributes  to  the  Son  of  God,  as  supreme  Priest,  the 
institution  of  ministers  of  the  gospel.  The  Helvetic 
Confession  declares  that  "  the  origin,  institution,  and 
function  of  ministers  is  most  ancient,  and  is  an  ordinance 
of  God  himself,  not  a  novelty  or  of  man's  devising."  The 
Reformed  of  the  Netherlands  profess  to  appoint  ministers, 
elders,  and  deacons  "  in  such  order  and  manner  as 
the  word  of  God  prescribes."  The  English  Calvinists 
were  no  less  positive,  and  Hooker,  in  hiy  controversy 
with  them,  had  to  show  that  they  attributed  to  the  Divine 
Word  an  even  too  precise  and  detailed  ordering  of  the 
sacred  ministry.' 

'   Hooker,  Eccl.  Pol.,  v.  So.     See  Note  A  at  llie  end  of  llic  volume. 


T]ic  Content  of  Christian  Doctrine  IJ 

According  to  a  principle  already  laid  down,  a  tradition 
of  the  whole  Christian  society  so  firmly  rooted  that 
no  stress  of  controversy  could  shake  it,  a  tradition 
which  underlay  controversy  about  the  matter  of  the 
tradition  itself  and  was  the  fundamental  postulate  of 
all  parties  alike,  a  tradition  concerning  those  primary 
ideas  of  government  about  which  every  society  is 
tenaciously  conservative, — such  a  tradition  is  of  itself 
good  historical  evidence  for  the  fact  of  a  definite  com- 
mission given  by  our  Lord  to  the  first  Pastors  of  the 
Church.  The  tradition  is  found  in  possession  from  a 
very  early  date.  The  Epistle  of  St.  Clement  of  Rome  to 
the  Corinthians  supplies,  indeed,  little  evidence  about 
the  mode  in  which  the  ministerial  commission  was 
conveyed,  but  is  clear  and  unmistakable  about  the  con- 
linous  transmission  of  authority  from  the  Lord  himself. 
The  Fathers  of  the  second  century,  it  is  allowed  on  all 
hands,  knew  no  other  opinion.  In  controversy  with 
heretics  they  triumphantly  adduced  the  succession  of 
authority  in  the  Apostolic  churches,  an  argument  in 
their  eyes  indisputable  and  conclusive.^ 

In  face  of  such  a  tradition  the  complete  silence  of 
Scripture  would  be  insignificant.  But  Scripture  is  not 
silent.  There  are  many  passages  of  the  New  Testament 
which  are  in  perfect  accord  with  the  tradition.  They  are 
patient  indeed  of  another  interpretation,  but  that  inter- 
pretation can  be  maintained  only  by  setting  aside  or 
ignoring  the  evidence  of  the  tradition.  To  examine  the 
records  of  the  New  Testament  without  using  this  evidence 
is  to  attempt  a  delicate  piece  of  work  without  using  the 
I)roper  tools.     The  historic  Church,  the  Church  as  known 

'  Clem.  Rom.,  Ad  Cor.,  yj~AA-  See  the  treatment  of  this  subject 
in  Gore,  T/ie  Church  and  the  Ministry  ;  and  Moberly,  Ministerial 
Priesthood,  cli.  iv. 


38  The  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

to  the  later  Christian  tradition,  is  without  all  question 
the  outcome  or  effect  of  the  events  recorded  in  New 
Testament.  But  causes  can  be  investigated  only  by 
watching  their  effects,  and  it  is  useless  to  study  the 
Apostolic  Church  without  reference  to  later  growth.^ 
The  writings  of  the  New  Testament  might  perhaps  be 
studied  in  isolation  if  they  were  systematic  treatises, 
though  even  then  the  result  would  be  unsatisfactory ;  but 
they  are  in  fact  occasional  writings,  and  they  can  be 
understood  only  in  relation  to  the  state  of  things  which 
gave  them  birth.  That  state  of  things  was  the  con- 
tinuous growth  of  a  society,  the  Christian  Church,  every 
stage  of  which  can  be  rightly  understood  only  in  relation 
to  other  stages.  The  question  before  us  concerns  the 
constitution  of  that  society.  It  is  a  question  purely  of 
fact ;  whether  in  fact  the  essential  constitution  of  the 
sacred  ministry  was  given  by  revelation  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ ;  whether  it  be  in  fact  a  matter  of  Christian 
doctrine.  I  take  that  question  to  be  answered  in  the 
afifirmative  by  the  persistent  tradition  of  the  Christian 


*  This  seems  to  me  the  one  flital  flaw  in  the  otherwise  luminous 
work  of  Dr.  Hort,  already  referred  to,  on  The  Cliristiaii  Eccksia. 
He  says  (p.  2),  "The  larger  part  of  our  subject  lies  in  the  region 
of  ^^  hat  we  commonly  call  Church  History ;  the  general  Christian 
liistory  of  the  ages  subsequent  to  the  Apostolic  age.  But  before 
entering  on  that  region  we  must  devote  some  little  time  to  matter 
contained  in  the  Bible  itself.  It  is  hopeless  to  try  to  understand 
either  the  actual  Ecclesia  of  post-apostolic  times,  or  the  thoughts 
of  its  own  contemporaries  about  it,  without  first  gaining  some  clear 
impressions  as  to  the  Ecclesia  of  the  Apostles  out  of  which  it 
grew  ;  to  say  nothing  of  the  influence  exerted  all  along  by  the  words 
of  the  apostolic  writings  and  by  other  parts  of  Scripture."  True  ; 
but  it  is  equally  hopeless  to  try  to  understand  the  "  Ecclesia  of  the 
Apostles  "  without  reference  to  its  after-growth.  The  mistake  lies 
in  treating  either  part  of  the  subject  in  isolation. 


The  Content  of  CJiristian  Doctrine  39 

Church  reading  in  the  required  sense  the  words  of  the 
Lord  himself. 

The  constitution  of  the  Church  then,  as  a  social 
organism  with  a  duly  appointed  ministry,  is  to  be  taken 
as  a  matter  of  Christian  doctrine.  And  since  the  Church 
is  generically  a  society  of  men,  it  is  necessary  to  know  the 
specific  marks  or  characteristics  by  which  it  is  distinguished 
from  other  societies.  These  may  be  in  part  such  as  have 
been  acquired  in  the  course  of  ages,  and  are  therefore 
results  of  human  experience  and  objects  of  purely  natural 
knowledge.  The  Church  has  a  history,  and  is  known  by 
that  history.  But  more  important  are  those  notes  which 
belong  essentially  to  the  Church,  and  are  the  immediate 
consequence  of  the  Divine  ordering.  These  must  be 
sought  in  the  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  are  included 
in  the  scheme  of  Christian  doctrine. 

The  Church  exists  for  a  certain  end.  Human  society 
in  general  exists  for  the  right  ordering  of  human  life, 
materially  and  morally.^  The  Church,  the  society  of 
redeemed  and  regenerate  humanity,  exists  for  the  right 
ordering  of  the  higher  or  spiritual  life.  It  is  none  the 
less  external,  for  this  life  is  to  be  lived  in  the  body,  and 
under  the  ordinary  conditions  of  humanity,  reinforced, 
not  superseded,  by  the  working  of  Divine  grace.  The 
spiritual  life  depends  in  the  first  instance  on  the  know- 
ledge of  God,  and  the  first  office  of  the  Church  is  to  see 
that  men  have  this  knowledge ;  the  Church  has  a  teach- 
ing office.  In  the  second  place,  there  are  certain  external 
means  of  grace  appointed  by  God,  of  which  the  Church 
is  the  keeper  and  dispenser ;  the  Church  has  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  sacraments.  By  the  ministry  of  the  Word  and 
the  Sacraments  the  primary  spiritual  needs  of  the  individual 

'   Aristotle,  Pol.,  i.  2  :  Tivofxeyr]  /uef  oiiv  rod  ^TJr  eVe/cer,  oiicra  Se  tov 


40  TJie  Ekinciits  of  Christian  Doctrine 

are  supplied,  and  he  is  so  fitted  for  his  place  in  the  social 
order  of  redeemed  humanity.  These  things  all  helong 
to  Christian  doctrine.  There  is  much  about  them  which 
is  proper  to  social  organization  as  such,  and  so  belongs 
to  the  natural  order;  there  is  much  that  comes  from 
human  authority  within  the  Church,  and  from  no  higher 
source.  These  elements  are  carefully  to  be  distinguished  ; 
there  remains  in  the  organization  of  the  Church  some- 
thing essential  and  peculiar  to  this  society,  according  to 
the  will  of  God  made  known  to  us  by  Jesus  Christ. 

The  study  of  the  marks  or  characteristics  of  the  Church 
is  the  more  important  because  there  are  groups  of 
individuals  which  claim  to  form  exclusively  the  society 
in  question,  and  their  claim  is  denied  by  others.  This 
claim,  therefore,  must  be  tested ;  and  it  can  be  tested 
only  by  finding  whether  all  the  characteristic  marks  of 
the  Christian  Church  are  found  in  the  group  asserting 
the  claim,  and  whether  some  of  them  are  found  ex- 
clusively in  that  group.  It  is  evident  that  in  such  cases 
there  will  be  a  tendency  consciously  or  unconsciously 
to  insist  on  those  characteristics  which  are  most  apparent 
in  the  group  in  question,  or  on  the  other  hand  to 
emphasize  those  in  which  it  appears  to  be  lacking.  When, 
for  example,  the  Donatists  of  the  fourth  century  claimed 
that  they  and  they  alone  formed  the  true  Christian  Church, 
they  naturally  insisted  on  those  Christian  characteristics 
in  which  they  supposed  themselves  to  be  conspicuously 
superior  ;  their  opponents  as  naturally  emphasized  the 
points  in  which  they  fell  short  of  the  ideal.  This  con- 
troversial treatment  of  the  marks  of  the  Church  leads 
inevitably  to  a  loss  of  proportion.  Nor  is  it  easy,  in  the 
presence  of  a  practical  dispute,  to  treat  the  matter  without 
regard  to  controversy.  We  can  only  attempt  with  the 
least  possible  prejudice  to  search  and  to  set  out  the  solid 


The  Content  of  Christian  Doctrine  41 

core  of  Christian  doctrine,  by   reference   to   whicli   the 
controversy  must  be  determined. 

A  similar  difficulty  occurs  in  dealing  with  the  discipline 
of  the  Church.  There  are  differences  of  opinion  among 
professed  Christians,  difterences  aftecting  not  merely 
details  of  practice  in  regard  to  which  divergent  usages 
may  coexist  in  one  society,  but  matters  which  are 
regarded  by  some  at  least  of  the  disputants  as  funda- 
mental. Thus  we  have  certain  groups  of  professed 
Christians  who  claim  to  be  observing  all  the  essential 
rules  of  discipline  by  which  the  Christian  society  is  held 
together,  and  we  find  other  professed  Christians  altogether 
denying  their  claim.  There  are  some  who  maintain  as 
part  of  that  essential  discipline  a  system  of  no  small 
complexity ;  others  allow  nothing  beyond  the  bare 
elements  of  social  order  to  be  essential.  Episcopal  rule 
is  held  by  some  to  be  a  necessary  part  of  ecclesiastical 
organization ;  by  others  it  is  regarded  as  only  one  form 
in  which  the  government  of  the  Church  may  lawfully  be 
cast ;  others  yet  again  contend  that  ecclesiastical  order 
essentially  consists  in  subordination  to  a  single  superior, 
who  is  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  the  visible  head  of  the  Church 
on  earth.  The  question  of  discipline  is  therefore  entangled 
in  controversy,  and  a  treatment  of  it  which  should  ignore 
controversy  is  hardly  possible.  The  matter  is  often 
treated  as  a  question  whether  such  and  such  a  group  is 
in  truth  a  part  of  the  Church  ;  and  those  who  seem  to 
deny  this  are  said  by  a  barbarous  term  to  unchurch  the 
claimants.  But  the  question  is  not  correctly  posed  in 
this  form.  It  has  two  faults.  In  the  first  place,  it 
obscures  the  nature  of  membership  in  the  Church.  Such 
membership  is  conferred  on  individuals,  not  on  groups 
of  persons,  and  no  man  is  within  the  Church  by  aggrega- 
tion to  any  smaller  body,  but  only  by  aggregation  to  the 


42  The  Elements  of  Christia7i  Doctrine 

Church  itself.  In  the  second  place,  it  suggests  that  men 
are  within  the  Church  by  reason  of  their  observance  of 
the  Church's  discipline.  The  converse  is  rather  true. 
Men  are  bound  to  observe  the  discipline  of  the  Church 
because  they  are  within  the  Church.  There  is,  therefore, 
in  all  these  controversies,  a  preliminary  question,  whether 
such  and  such  persons  are  individually  members  of  the 
Christian  Church.  The  question  may  then  be  raised, 
whether  such  persons,  being  within  the  Church,  do 
individually  or  collectively  observe  the  essential  dis- 
cipline of  the  Church.  But  what  is  the  essential  discipline 
of  the  Church  ?  On  this  point  turn  most  of  the  disputes 
by  which  the  Christian  society  is  in  practice  divided. 
How  then  shall  the  question  be  answered  ?  The  divisions 
of  Christendom,  some  being  of  long  standing,  and  having 
their  roots  in  a  remote  past,  raise  an  obvious  difficulty. 
We  lack  that  uniform  tradition  of  the  whole  Christian 
society,  or  at  least  of  its  greater  part,  by  which  we 
determine  most  surely  the  sense  of  Christian  teaching. 
The  divisions  indeed  perpetuate  themselves  just  because 
they  hinder  that  solution  of  controversy  by  which  alone 
they  can  be  ended.  Here  again,  then,  treating  the 
matter  as  uncontroversially  as  possible,  we  can  but  state 
what  seems  to  be  most  clearly  established  in  the  consti- 
tution of  the  Church  as  given  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
leaving  doubtful  points  as  doubtful. 

So  far  we  are  concerned  with  Christian  theory — the 
apprehension  of  truth.  There  remains  a  ])art  of  Christian 
doctrine,  the  importance  of  which  is  altogether  out  of 
proportion  to  the  space  which  its  treatment  will  demand. 
It  is  the  doctrine  of  Christian  practice,  or  Religion. 
Religion  is  submission  of  the  human  will  to  the  Will  of 
God.  It  is  good  and  true  in  measure  as  it  is  founded  in 
true  knowledge  of  God.     Its  strength  is  another  matter. 


The  Content  of  Christian  Doctrine  43 

Men  may  adhere  earnestly  to  a  false  religion.  A  religion 
the  most  degraded,  because  founded  in  the  most  degraded 
idea  of  God,  may  have  the  strongest  possible  hold  on  its 
votaries.  By  revelation  God  has  sought  to  make  known 
to  men,  not  his  Nature  only,  but  his  Will.  This  part 
of  revelation  proceeded  even  more  slowly  than  the  other ; 
both  alike  are  complete  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus  Christ. 
The  Christian  religion  is  submission  to  the  Will  of  God 
as  revealed  by  him.  It  is  an  active,  not  a  passive,  sub- 
mission. It  consists  in  the  willing  performance  of  those 
duties  which  are  laid  upon  us  by  the  teaching  of  the 
gospel.  Christian  doctrine  therefore  includes  the  decla- 
ration of  these  duties.  They  are  few  and  simple,  but  so 
comprehensive  as  to  cover  the  whole  of  human  life. 

In  the  first  place,  we  shall  have  to  consider  the  nature 
of  Conscience,  the  faculty  by  which  duty  is  recognized 
as  such.  What  faith  is  to  the  apprehension  of  doctrine, 
conscience  will  be  to  the  apprehension  of  practical  duties  ; 
with  this  difference  however,  that  whereas  faith  is  con- 
cerned only  with  truth  supernaturally  revealed,  the 
conscience  apprehends  alike  the  duties  imposed  by  the 
natural  law  and  those  inculcated  by  revelation.  Follow- 
ing this  distinction,  the  Christian  religion  is  the  observance 
alike  of  natural  duties  and  of  those  to  which  a  man  is 
bound  by  virtue  of  his  admission  to  the  Christian  Church. 
But  even  these  latter  are  laid  upon  man  for  the  fulfilment 
of  the  end  of  his  natural  being.  He  is  united  to  the 
Body  of  Christ  in  order  that  he  may  find  his  own  proper 
perfection.  The  end  of  the  Christian  religion  is  the 
attainment  of  this  perfection,  the  nature  of  which  we  shall 
therefore  have  occasion  to  consider. 

Under  these  heads  we  shall  study  the  elements  of 
Christian  doctrine.  We  must  distinguish  the  truths 
which    are   actually  taught   by   revelation    of  God,   the 


44  ^/<'<''  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

necessary  inferences  that  follow,  the  opinions  which  are 
to  be  held  with  certainty.  We  must  mark,  on  the  othei 
hand,  opinions  which  attain  to  a  less  degree  of 
probability,  and  set  aside  those  which  are  clearly  to  be 
rejected,  because  in  conflict  with  the  truth. 

Part  III. — T/w  Proposition  of  Faith 

"  How  shall  they  believe,"  asks  St.  Paul,  "  in  him  whom 
they  have  not  heard  ?  and  how  shall  they  hear  without  a 
preacher  ?  and  how  shall  they  preach,  except  they  be 
sent  ?  "  The  doctrine  of  Christ  must  be  set  before  men  ; 
then  only  can  they  receive  it ;  then  only  can  they  bear 
the  responsibility  of  rejecting  it.  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
himself  set  before  men  the  truth  of  God;  those  who 
received  it  from  him  set  it  before  others  in  turn,  being 
sent  for  this  very  purpose.  The  Apostles  were  the  few 
who  were  more  especially  appointed  for  this  end.  They 
in  particular,  though  not  they  alone,  are  referred  to  in 
our  Lord's  words,  "  He  that  receiveth  whomsoever  I  send 
receiveth  me."  To  the  Seventy,  who  received  a  limited 
commission  like  that  of  the  Twelve,  he  said,  "  He  that 
heareth  you  heareth  me ;  and  he  that  rejecteth  you 
rejecteth  me  ;  and  he  that  rejecteth  me  rejecteth  him 
that  sent  me."  ' 

This  communication  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ  to  all 
who  will  receive  it  is  called  by  theologians  the  Proposition 
or  Proposal  of  Faith.  Such  proposition  imposes  on  the 
hearer  the  duty  of  acceptance.  He  is  intellectually  free 
to  believe  or  disbelieve,  but  he  is  not  morally  free.  He 
is  intellectually  free,  because  revealed  truths  are  not  of  a 
nature  to  carry  necessary  conviction  to  the  mind  as  soon 
as  they  are  stated.  They  are  accepted,  as  we  have  seen, 
'   Rum.  X.  14;  Joliii  xiii.  20;   Luke  x.  16. 


TJie  Proposition  of  Faith  45 

by  faith  in  him  who  has  revealed  them  ;  and  apart  from 
this  requirement  of  faith,  we  need  evidence  to  prove  that 
he  has  in  fact  revealed  what  is  propounded.  But  the 
hearer  is  not  morally  free  to  disbelieve.  Rejection  of 
revealed  truth  is  continually  spoken  of  as  wrong-doing. 
It  is  treated  as  a  part  of  that  separation  from  God  which 
is  at  once  the  effect  and  the  mark  of  sin.  "  He  that  is  of 
God  heareth  the  words  of  God,"  said  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  to  the  doubting  or  unbelieving  Jews ;  "  for  this 
cause  ye  hear  them  not,  because  ye  are  not  of  God." 
The  reason  is  not  far  to  seek.  Since  God  has  willed  to 
make  himself  known  to  men,  it  would  be  dishonouring 
him  to  suppose  that  the  means  chosen  and  used  for  this 
revelation  were  insufficient  for  the  purpose.  His  complete 
and  final  revelation  is  by  his  Son  Jesus  Christ,  There- 
fore we  are  bound,  on  the  hypothesis  of  revelation,  to 
hold  that  Jesus  Christ  made  known  the  truth  of  God  in 
a  way  that  ought  to  have  carried  conviction.  His  cre- 
dentials, so  to  say,  were  sufficient  to  remove  all  reasonable 
doubt.  Accordingly,  in  the  Gospel  narrative  we  con- 
tinually find  men  driven  to  confess  that  he  was  indeed 
sent  from  God.  He  appealed  confidently  to  his  cre- 
dentials. "  The  works  which  the  Father  hath  given  me 
to  accomplish,  the  very  works  that  I  do,  bear  witness 
of  me."  Those  therefore  who  rejected  him  were  inex- 
cusable. "  If  I  had  not  done  among  them  the  works 
which  none  other  did,  they  had  not  had  sin  :  but  now 
have  they  both  seen  and  hated  both  me  and  my  Father."  ' 
The  nature  of  human  responsibility  requires  us  to  limit 
this  judgment  to  those  upon  whom  the  Lord's  teaching 
and  the  manifestation  of  his  Divine  mission  were  actually 
brought  to  bear.  But  further,  he  adapted  his  teaching  to 
the  capacity  of  the  hearers.     Even  to  the  Twelve,  and 

'  John  viii.  47  ;  v.  36  ;   xv.  24. 


46         TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

that  on  the  last  night  before  his  Passion,  he  said,  "  I  have 
yet  many  things  to  say  unto  you,  but  ye  cannot  bear  them 
now."  This  does  not  mean  that  he  accommodated  his 
doctrine  to  the  natural  and  acquired  abilities  or  to  the 
prejudices  of  men.  Otherwise  he  would  not  on  the  one 
hand  have  chosen  rude  Galileans  to  be  the  depositaries 
of  revelation,  nor  on  the  other  hand  have  condemned  the 
Pharisees  and  the  chiefs  of  Judaism  for  their  rejection 
of  teaching  which  ran  most  strongly  counter  to  their 
traditions.  It  can  only  mean  that  he  put  before  men 
just  so  much  of  Divine  truth  as  they  were  morally 
required  to  believe,  the  credentials  being  what  they  were. 
As  the  reality  first  of  his  Divine  mission,  then  of  his  own 
Divine  power,  was  gradually  disclosed,  he  unfolded  truths 
which  made  the  greater  demands,  not  on  the  understand- 
ing, but  on  the  faith  of  his  hearers.  To  reject  him  in 
the  beginning  as  a  Prophet  was  a  moral  delinquency  of 
the  same  kind  as  to  reject  him  in  the  end  as  Son  of  God. 
His  full  revelation  could  not  be  made,  even  to  his 
intimates,  until  he  had  finally  established  his  claim  to 
their  confidence  by  the  Resurrection.  St,  John  says 
twice,  and  with  emphasis,  that  only  when  the  Lord  was 
raised  from  the  dead,  or  glorified,  did  his  disciples  under- 
stand certain  parts  of  his  life  or  teaching.' 

The  Proposition  of  Faith  means  then,  in  the  first 
instance,  the  active  teaching  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
propounded  in  varying  measure  to  various  persons,  in  full 
measure  to  certain  chosen  ones  after  his  resurrection.  To 
them  he  unfolded  the  whole  counsel  of  God,  and  within 
a  few  days  fixed  it  in  their  hearts  and  memories  by  send- 
ing to  them  the  Holy  Ghost.  Those  who  did  not  accept 
it,  when  put  before  them  according  to  their  several 
measure,  are  condemned  as  guilty  of  sin.  The  Proposi- 
'   Tohn  xvi.  12  ;  ii.  22  ;  xii.  16. 


The  Proposition  of  Faith  47 

tion  of  Faith  was  continued  by  those  who  deUvered  to 
others  what  they  received  from  the  Lord  ;  and  it  continued 
to  impose  the  same  responsibihty  on  the  hearer.     They 
who  received  or  rejected  him  that  was  sent  received  or 
rejected  the  sender.      Belief  or  unbelief  is  never  spoken 
of  in  the  New  Testament  as  a  choice  of  the  intellect ;  it 
is  a  moral  choice  between  good  and  evil.      The  main 
argument  of  St.  Paul  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans  turns 
on  the  principle  that  belief  in  the  Gospel  is  a  moral 
action.      Those  who  refused  it  are  reprobated  as  dis- 
obedient.     The  same  is  the  teaching  of  St.  James,  who 
bids  the  Jews  of  the  Dispersion  "  receive  with  meekness 
the    implanted  word."     The  Jews  of  Beroea   are   com- 
mended,   not  as  intelligent,  but  as  noble,  or  generous, 
because  they  received   the   word  with  all   readiness  of 
mind.      Faith  is  a  gift  of  God,  a  supernatural  virtue; 
when  the  gospel  was  first  preached  at  Antioch  of  Pisidia, 
as  "  many  as  were  ordained  to  eternal  life  believed  ;  "  the 
preachers  of  the  gospel,  says  St.  Paul  to  the  Corinthians, 
"  are  Ministers  through  whom  ye  believed,  and  each  as 
the  Lord  gave  to  him."     But  this  must  not  be  pressed  to 
the  overthrow  of  human  responsibility.      "  We  ought  to 
welcome  such,"  says  St.  John,  "  that  we  may  be  fellow- 
workers  with  the  truth."    The  reason  was  then,  as  always, 
that  God,  purposing  to  make  himself  known,  had  provided 
sufficient  means.    There  was  testimony  to  the  truth,  which 
if  a  man  rejected  he  rejected  out  of  perversity.      "  He 
that  believeth  not  God  hath  made  him  a  liar ;  because  he 
hath  not  believed  in   the  witness  that  God  hath  borne 
concerning  his  Son."      They  who    preached  the  gospel 
gave  a  sufficient   testimony;    and  those  to  whom  they 
testified  were  therefore  bound  to  receive  it,  as  those  who 
had  heard  the  Lord  himself  were  bound  to  receive  his 
word.    "  Ye  received  me,"  says  St.  Paul  to  the  Galatians, 


48  TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

"  as  an  angel  of  God,  even  as  Christ  Jesus."  At  an 
earlier  period  he  described  men  as  disorderly,  who  would 
not  follow  his  tradition ;  and  he  made  this  peremptory 
claim  of  moral  authority  :  "  If  any  man  obeyeth  not  our 
word  by  this  epistle,  note  that  man,  that  ye  have  no 
company  with  him,  to  the  end  that  he  maybe  ashamed."  ^ 
The  Apostles,  we  must  remember,  did  not  speak  in 
their  own  name.  They  did  not  claim  to  have  an  original 
revelation.  They  taught  by  tradition  ;  that  is  to  say,  by 
delivering  to  others  what  they  had  received.  Their, 
witness  was  therefore  twofold.  They  had  to  put  before 
men  at  once  the  teaching  and  the  credentials  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  In  the  latter  aspect  they  were 
witnesses  of  the  Resurrection ;  in  the  former  aspect  they 
were  guardians  of  a  deposit.  They  were  to  add  nothing 
of  their  own  ;  or  if  they  added  anything  by  way  of 
counsel  or  opinion,  they  were  to  mark  it  carefully  as 
their  own.  "  Concerning  virgins,"  said  St.  Paul,  "  I 
have  no  commandment  of  the  Lord ;  but  I  give  my 
judgment,  as  one  that  hath  obtained  mercy  of  the  Lord 
to  be  faithful."  He  says  modestly  in  conclusion,  "  I 
think  that  I  also  have  the  Spirit  of  God."  But  when  he 
was  on  the  ground  of  revelation,  he  could  say,  "  I  give 
charge,  yea  not  I,  but  the  Lord."  We  have  here  the 
important  distinction,  of  which  there  will  be  more  to 
say,  between  Christian  doctrine  and  Christian  opinion. 
When  giving  a  simple  opinion  St.  Paul  had  a  certain 
claim  on  the  obedience  of  his  spiritual  children  ;  when 
he  proposed  to  them  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  he  claimed 
an  obedience  of  absolute  obligation.  The  witness  that  he 
bore  was  such  that  men  could  not  reject  it  without  sin.'- 

'   Rom.  xv.  31  ;  James  i.  21  ;  Acts  xvii.  Ii  ;  xiii.  48  ;   I  Cor.  iii. 
5  ;  3  John  8 ;  I  John  v.  10  ;  Gal.  iv.  14  ;  2  Thess.  iii.  6,  14. 
-  I  Cor.  vii.  10,  25,  40. 


The  Proposition  of  Faith  49 

\Ve  must  here  pause  to  ask  what  is  meant  by  the  sin 
of  unbeUef.  It  is  described  by  St.  John  as  making  God 
a  liar.  The  rejection  of  revealed  truth  is  in  the  same 
order  as  the  rejection  of  natural  religion.  St.  Paul  has 
set  out  the  guilt  of  this  rejection  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  :  "  The  wrath  of  God  is  revealed  from  heaven 
against  all  ungodliness  and  unrighteousness  of  men,  who 
hold  down  the  truth  in  unrighteousness  ;  because  that 
which  may  be  known  of  God  is  manifest  in  them ;  for 
God  manifested  it  unto  them.  For  the  invisible  things 
of  him  since  the  creation  of  the  world  are  clearly  seen, 
being  perceived  through  the  things  that  are  made,  even 
his  everlasting  power  and  divinity."  That  is  to  say, 
nature  gives  sufficient  testimony  to  the  being  and  power 
of  God.  And  speaking  generally,  this  testimony  is 
sufficiently  proposed  to  all  men.  Therefore  those  who 
reject  it  are  without  excuse,  "  because  that,  knowing  God, 
they  glorified  him  not  as  God,  neither  gave  thanks  ;  but 
became  vain  in  their  reasonings,  and  their  senseless  heart 
was  darkened."  They  were  not  left  in  helpless  ignorance 
or  doubt,  but  as  moral  agents,  having  the  choice  of  truth 
and  falsehood,  "  they  refused  to  have  God  in  their  know- 
ledge." The  sin  here  consists  in  the  refusal  to  employ 
according  to  the  will  of  God  the  testimony  of  himself  which 
he  affords.  The  same  sin  is  involved  in  the  rejection  of 
revealed  religion.  Sin  being  generically  a  disordered 
misuse  of  creation,  the  sin  of  unbelief  is  the  misuse  or 
neglect  of  those  means  by  which  God  has  willed  to  make 
himself  known.  This  needs  pressing ;  for  a  certain  un- 
willingness to  acknowledge  that  unbelief  is  sin,  an 
inclination  to  reckon  it  only  as  an  intellectual,  not  a 
moral  defect,  has  led  to  much  confusion.  Compelled  by 
the  stern  language  of  Scripture  to  allow  that  there  is  in 
unbelief  at  least  something  of  the  nature   of  sin,  men 

E 


50         The  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

look  for  the  element  of  sinfulness,  not  in  the  unhclief 
itself,  but  in  its  secondary  causes.  They  assume  that 
unbelief  is  ordinarily  caused  by  moral  disorders  which 
blind  or  warp  the  judgment :  where  it  is  found  consisting 
with  general  purity  and  nobility  of  character,  it  is  treated 
as  abnormal,  a  puzzle  to  the  understanding,  not  a  thing 
calling  for  moral  condemnation.  But  a  normal  connection 
of  this  kind  between  unbelief  and  other  forms  of  depravity 
cannot  be  traced.  It  is  true  that  general  depravity  may 
hinder  belief.  "  Men  loved  the  darkness  rather  than  the 
light,"  says  our  Lord,  "for  their  works  were  evil."  But 
Ave  may  not  infer  this  particular  cause  from  the  effect ;  and 
indeed  St.  Paul,  while  recognizing  the  connection,  inverts 
the  order,  and  treats  general  depravity  as  a  natural  con- 
sequence of  unbelief.  Because  men  would  not  have  God 
in  their  knowledge,  therefore  "  God  gave  them  over  to  a 
reprobate  mind,  to  do  those  things  w^hich  are  not  fitting." 
But  neither  is  this  a  necessary  consequence,  nor  is  it  this 
which  makes  the  sin  of  unbelief.  Regarded  in  itself, 
unbelief  is  a  misuse  of  God's  gift,  and  is  therefore  a  sin.^ 
To  return  :  if  rejection  of  the  faith  be  sin,  there  must 
be  a  sufificient  proposition  of  the  faith.  Sin  is  an  act  of 
the  will ;  and  until  the  faith  is  presented  to  the  under- 
standing it  cannot  be  rejected  by  the  will.  The  mere 
absence  of  belief  is  no  sin  ;  there  must  be  an  act  of 
rejection.  If  a  man  err  through  ignorance,  such  error 
will  not  bring  him  into  condemnation,  unless  indeed,  as 
Bramhall  says,  he  "  err  with  obstinacy,  not  willing  to 
embrace  the  truth,  though  it  were  sufficiently  proposed."  ■' 
But  actual  unbelief,  we  are  taught,  is  ordinarily  actual  sin. 
It  follows  that  we  have  in  fact  a  sufficient  proposition  of 
the  faith.    Under  ordinary  conditions  the  truths  of  natural 

'  Rom.  i.  18-28 ;  John  iii.  19. 
■'  Bramhall,  ]Vorks,  vol.  v.  p.  206. 


TJie  Proposition  of  Faith  51 

religion  are  sufficiently  proposed  to  all  men.  In  like 
manner  revealed  truth  is  sufficiently  proposed,  not  indeed 
to  all  men,  but  to  all  those  to  whom  the  gospel  is  preached. 
It  was  so  proposed  by  the  Lord  himself;  it  was  so  pro- 
posed in  the  time  of  the  Apostles ;  it  continues  to  be 
so  proposed. 

\Vho  then  is  the  proponent  ?  As  we  have  seen,  the 
Apostles  had  to  put  before  the  world  two  things,  the 
teaching  of  Christ  and  his  credentials.  In  doing  this 
they  needed  credentials  of  their  own.  Their  proposition 
was  sufficient ;  but  why  ?  AVhy  were  men  bound  in  con- 
science to  believe  their  report  ?  Two  reasons  are 
conceivable.  Either  it  was  sufficient  in  itself  to  carry 
conviction,  or  it  was  proposed  by  a  sufficient  authority. 
The  former  reason  is  not  lightly  to  be  passed  by.  The 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  seems  to  imply  more  than  once  that 
such  immediate  conviction  is  possible,  at  least  for  some 
men  or  in  some  conditions  of  heart  and  mind.  "  If  any 
man  willeth  to  do  his  will,  he  shall  know  of  the  teaching, 
whether  it  be  of  God."  The  truth  itself  may  appeal  to 
men.  "  If  I  say  truth,  why  do  ye  not  believe  me  ?  He 
that  is  of  God  heareth  the  words  of  God  :  for  this  cause 
ye  heard  them  not,  because  ye  are  not  of  God."  ^  There 
are  men  at  all  times  to  whom  the  teaching  of  the  gospel 
seems  to  come  home  as  evident  truth.  They  may  fortify 
themselves  with  these  passages ;  but  it  must  always 
remain  doubtful  how  far  they  are  influenced  by  a  habit 
of  thought  working  secretly  in  their  minds.  The  obliga- 
tion to  believe  was  not  put  by  the  Lord  on  this  ground. 
It  was  because  of  the  works  that  he  had  done  among 

'  John  vii.  17  ;  viii.  46.  St.  Paul's  words  in  2  Cor.  iv.  2  may  seem 
at  first  sight  to  look  the  same  way,  but  he  is  more  probably  speak- 
ing of  personal  confidence  in  a  teacher  secured  by  open  and  straight- 
forward dealing. 


52  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

them,  such  as  none  other  did,  that  he  convicted  those 
who  rejected  him  of  the  sin  of  unbelief.  However  potent, 
therefore,  the  internal  evidence  of  the  truth,  it  was  not 
sufficient  to  impose  the  moral  obligation  of  believing. 
But  if  it  was  not  sufficient  when  the  Lord  himself  was 
the  proponent,  much  less  could  it  be  sufficient  when  the 
truth  was  presented  by  his  ministers.  Nor  is  this  all  the 
difficulty.  These  ministers  had  also  to  put  before  men 
the  credentials  upon  which  the  Lord  himself  insisted. 
These  were  his  life  and  works,  and,  above  all,  his  Resur- 
rection. But  if  the  doctrine  was  not  self-evident,  still  less 
were  the  credentials.  They  were  historical  facts.  There 
is  some  plausibility,  and  perhaps  something  more,  in  the 
contention  that  our  Lord's  recorded  life  is  too  perfect  in 
its  beauty  to  be  a  fiction ;  that  it  could  not  be  invented 
unless  by  a  man  of  equally  perfect  character.  But  this 
cannot  be  said  of  the  Resurrection,  which  the  Apostles 
put  forward  as  the  main  ground  for  believing  the  truths 
of  the  gospel.  They  were,  first  and  foremost,  witnesses 
of  the  Resurrection.  This  was  a  thing  in  itself  most 
improbable;  its  natural  improbability  was,  in  fact, 
precisely  what  gave  it  evidential  force.  It  has,  indeed, 
been  said,  and  well  said,  that  the  Resurrection  was  "  the 
appropriate — the  obviously  appropriate — climax  to  the 
whole  of  Christ's  previous  attitude  towards  matter."  ^  But 
'this  conclusion  is  of  value  only  when  the  justice  of  that 
previous  attitude  is  acknowledged ;  that  is  to  say,  when 
the  whole  truth  of  the  gospel  is  accepted.  It  is  of 
infinite  value  for  the  reinforcement  of  faith  to  observe 
a  natural  and  not  an  arbitrary  connection  between  the 
credentials  and  the  teaching  which  they  support.  But  we 
are  considering  the  Resurrection  as  presented  to  men  not 
yet  believing.  To  them  it  is  presented  as  a  fact  by  no 
'   lllingwortli,  Divine  Immatifiice,  p.  lOO. 


The  Proposition  of  Faith  53 

means  self-evident.  The  truth  proposed  to  men  is  not 
therefore  sufficient  in  itself  to  carry  conviction.  We  are 
compelled  to  fall  back  upon  the  second  reason  for 
believing.  The  truth  is  sufficiently  proposed,  because  it 
is  proposed  by  a  sufficient  authority. 

The  Apostles  were  witnesses  of  the  Resurrection ; 
and  they  had  to  put  before  men  the  teaching  which 
they  had  received  from  the  Lord.  What  were  their 
credentials  ?  From  one  point  of  view  we  have  these  set 
forth  with  singular  fulness  in  St.  Paul's  controversial 
epistles.  His  apostolic  authority  was  challenged,  and 
he  had  to  meet  the  objectors.  His  main  position  is  that 
by  manifest  honesty  of  purpose  he  commended  himself 
to  every  human  conscience.  He  appealed  to  the  evidence 
of  his  disinterested  work ;  his  refusal  to  accept  even 
sustenance  from  those  whom  he  taught ;  his  abounding 
labours  and  sufferings  in  the  cause  of  the  gospel ;  his 
readiness  to  face  even  death.  Driven  by  stress  of  con- 
troversy, he  would  even  vaunt  these  things,  the  signs  of 
an  Apostle.  In  a  less  degree  he  relied  on  the  evidence 
of  miracles ;  but  he  returns  always  to  the  former  point  : 
he  would  have  men  say  of  him  that  he  was  a  truth-teller, 
and  when  he  spoke  of  his  own  experience  he  must  there- 
fore be  trusted.  "  We  are  made  manifest  unto  God," 
he  says,  "  and  I  hope  that  we  are  made  manifest  also  in 
your  conscience."  ^ 

These,  it  will  be  seen,  are  purely  personal  credentials ; 
they  could  affect  only  those  among  whom  St.  Paul  lived 
his  life.  And  more,  however  convincing  to  those  who 
knew  him  intimately,  they  were  subject  to  a  corroding 
doubt ;  there  was  always  the  possibility  of  hallucination. 
They  might  prove  St.  Paul's  honesty  ;    they  would  not 

'  See  the  Epistles  to  the  Corinthians,  passim,  and  especially 
2  Cor.  iv.  2,  II  ;  xii.  I,  12. 


54  The  Elements  of  Cliristian  Doctrine 

prove  his  possession  of  real  truth.  But  something  lay 
behind.  There  were  others  who  bore  the  same  testimony 
— the  original  Twelve.  They,  no  doubt,  had  the  same 
personal  credentials,  though  we  hear  less  of  them  because 
their  apostolate  was  never  challenged.  They  bore  united 
testimony ;  and  St.  Paul,  though  careful  to  guard  the 
independence  of  his  own  witness,  was  no  less  careful  to 
test  it  by  comparison  with  theirs.  "  I  laid  before  them,' 
he  says,  "  the  gospel  which  I  preach  among  the  Gentiles, 
but  privately  before  them  who  were  of  repute,  lest  by  any 
means  I  should  be  running,  or  had  run,  in  vain."  ^  Nor 
did  the  testimony  of  the  Twelve  stand  alone — the  witness 
of  a  small  knot  of  closely  associated  men  who  might  be 
suspect.  There  was  from  the  first  a  considerable  body 
of  men  who  stood  with  them.  St.  Paul  appealed  to  the 
witness  of  some  hundreds  for  the  Resurrection.  Some 
thousands  were  joined  to  them  while  the  memory  of  all 
they  recorded  was  yet  fresh."  Others  were  continually 
added  who,  if  they  brought  no  original  support,  testified 
at  least  to  conviction  carried  home  where  there  were 
ample  means  for  refuting  falsehood.  In  a  word,  the 
gospel  was  received  on  the  testimony  of  the  whole 
Church.  This  element  in  the  proposition  of  the  faith 
remains  constant.  The  Apostles  with  their  personal 
credentials  passed  away ;  the  Church  remained.  The 
proposition  was  weakened  on  one  side,  as  the  genera- 
tion that  was  near  to  the  events  passed  away  ;  it  was 
strengthened  on  another  side  by  the  wide  extension  of 
the  Church  and  the  multiplication  of  interlacing  traditions, 
which  added  to  the  difficulty,  and  therefore  to  the  value, 

'  Gal.  ii.  2. 

'  The  testimony  of  the  empty  grave  and  of  the  grave-clothes  to 
all  the  dwellers  in  Jerusalem  is  well  brought  out  in  Mr.  Latham's 
slinnilatin"  book  The  Risen  Master, 


TJie  Proposition  of  Faith  55 

of  unanimity.  We  have  already  considered  the  witness 
of  the  Church  to  Christian  doctrine.  We  now  come  to 
the  proposition  of  the  Church.  The  Church  at  large  is 
in  all  ages  the  proponent  of  the  faith. 

Let  us  recall  what  has  been  said  about  the  nature  of 
Christian  doctrine  and  the  faith  of  the  disciple  by  which 
it  is  received.  The  function  of  the  Church  as  the  pro- 
ponent of  the  gospel  is  to  put  before  men  the  teaching 
of  our  Lord  and  Master  Jesus  Christ,  together  with  his 
life  and  works  which  are  his  warrant  as  Teacher.  In 
this  way  men  are  made  disciples.  This  proposition  is 
sufficient,  with  a  sufficiency  that  is  of  God  ;  and  therefore 
he  who  rejects  it  is  ordinarily  guilty  of  sin.  Ordinarily  ; 
for  we  are  not  bound  to  suppose  it  sufficient  in  all  cir- 
cumstances for  all  men.  But  of  exceptional  cases  God 
alone,  the  reader  of  all  hearts,  can  judge.  The  proposition 
is  in  general  sufficient.  But  in  what  does  the  sufficiency 
consist  ?  In  other  words,  what  is  there  in  the  present- 
ment of  Christian  doctrine  which  binds  men  to  receive 
it  ?  This  is  not  the  same  thing  as  to  ask  why  men  do  as 
a  matter  of  fact  believe.  There  are  motives  in  great 
variety  which  induce  belief;  and  some  of  the  most  active 
are  such  as  it  would  certainly  be  no  sin  to  resist.  Early 
training,  habits  of  thought,  confidence  in  a  leader,  are 
common  motives  of  Christian  belief,  which  under  changed 
conditions  are  equally  motives  to  error.  What  we  are 
seeking  is  a  generally  sufficient  motive,  invariably  direct- 
ing men  to  the  right  end,  which  therefore  cannot  be 
resisted  without  sin. 

Two  answers  to  the  question  may  be  considered  and 
put  aside.  It  is  said  that  men  are  bound  to  believe  what 
is  proposed,  because  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Church,  the 
proponent.  But  the  infallibility  of  the  Church  is  itself  a 
part,  and  no  very  elementary  part,  of  the  doctrine  which 


56  TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

is  to  be  received.  To  a  believer  it  is  a  great  and  valuable 
stay ;  but  it  cannot  be  a  ground  of  believing  in  general. 
Refusal  to  accept  the  teaching  of  an  infallible  authority 
cannot  be  sinful  unless  there  are  previous  grounds  for 
believing  in  the  infallibility.  As  Bramhall  says,  "  if 
either  a  man  be  not  assured  that  there  is  an  infallible 
proponent,  or  be  not  assured  who  this  infallible  proponent 
is,  the  proposition  may  be  disbelieved  without  giving  God 
the  lie."  This  answer,  therefore,  will  not  do.  The 
infallibility  of  the  Church  may  be  a  valid  reason  to  certain 
persons  for  believing  certain  particulars  of  Christian 
doctrine ;  it  cannot  be  the  fundamental  reason  for 
accepting  Christ  as  Master.^ 

A  second  answer  grounds  the  obligation  of  believing 
on  the  sufficiency  of  Holy  Scripture.  The  proposition  of 
faith  is  contained  in  the  Bible  ;  the  Church  is  indeed  the 
proponent,  but  only  in  the  sense  of  directing  men  to  the 
Word  of  God.  A  preliminary  objection  to  this  may  be 
taken  at  once.  It  supposes  a  ground  of  sufficiency 
entirely  different  from  that  on  which  the  Apostles  relied  ; 
for  when  they  taught,  the  Scriptures  of  the  New  Testament 
did  not  exist.  Another  objection  sometimes  taken  is 
unsound.  We  cannot  impugn  the  sufficiency  of  Holy 
Scripture  on  the  ground  that  all  kinds  of  error  notoriously 
claim  its  support.  The  fact  that  a  man  wrests  the 
Scriptures  does  not  prove  their  insufficiency  for  guiding 
him  right  if  he  will  bend  his  will  to  learn.  The  sin  of 
unbelief  might  consist  exclusively  in  such  wresting  or 
neglect  of  the  Word  of  God.  But  there  is  a  more  search- 
ing objection.  What  is  meant  by  the  sufficiency  of  Holy 
Scripture?  Setting  aside  the  heedless  sayings  of  men 
who  do  not  weigh  their  words,  we  find  a  close  reasoner 
like  Calvin  maintaining  that  what  is  taught  in  the  Bible 
'  Bramhall,  Works,  vol.  ii.  p.  279. 


TJie  Proposition  of  Faith  57 

commends  itself  immediately  to  the  reader  as  Divine.' 
But  here  again  we  stumble  on  a  difficulty  already  met. 
The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself  did  not  claim  for  his  own 
spoken  words  such  immediate  acceptance.  He  appealed 
to  his  works  ;  and  for  the  rejection  of  this  evidence  pre- 
sented to  their  eyes  he  accounted  men  sinners.  Butif 
his  spoken  word  could  not  carry  conviction,  how  shall 
the  same  word  more  coldly  presented  after  the  lapse 
of  ages  on  the  written  page  ?  It  did  then,  and  does 
now,  carry  conviction  to  some  hearts,  and  a  special 
blessing  is  pronounced  on  these  ;  but  a  general  obligation 
to  believe  cannot  be  so  grounded.  Nor  can  it  be 
grounded  on  the  historic  record  in  the  Gospels  of  the 
Lord's  credentials,  his  Life,  his  Works,  his  Resurrec- 
tion. It  was  one  thing  to  see  and  know  these,  or  even 
to  hear  of  them  at  first  hand  from  eye-witnesses  ;  it  is  a 
very  different  thing  to  read  them  as  facts  of  history.  As 
recorded  in  the  Gospels  they  are  such  facts,  and  so  must 
stand  or  fall  by  the  rules  of  historical  evidence.  A 
careful  investigation  may  compel  intellectual  acceptance 
of  the  facts,  and  may  possibly  set  up  for  those  capable 
of  such  investigation  a  moral  obligation  to  believe.  But 
if  the  record  is  to  have  this  effect  in  general,  the  truth 
of  the  facts  must  be  directly  evident — so  evident  that 
refusal  to  believe  is  giving  God  the  lie.  It  cannot  be 
made  thus  evident  unless  by  the  supreme  power  of  God 
the  Creator  acting  on  the  mind  of  the  reader.  Calvin 
assumes  such  action,  and  so  becomes  logical.  The 
sufficiency  however  is  no  longer  in  the  Scriptures  them- 
selves, but  in  the  Divine  grace  which  enables  men  to 
see  the  truth.     This,  and  not   the  sufficiency  of  Holy 

'  Calvin,  Instit.,  i.  7,  §  4  :  "  Si  puros  oculos  et  integros  sensus 
illuc  aft'erimus  statim  occurret  Dei  maiestas  quae  subacta  reclaniandi 
audacia  nos  sibi  parere  cogat." 


58  TJie  Elements  of  Cliristiaii  Doctrine 

Scripture,  is  supposed  as  the  ground  of  the  obligation  to 
beUeve.  The  true  meaning  of  the  sufficiency  of  Holy 
Scripture  we  have  already  considered  when  dealing  with 
the  nature  of  Christian  doctrine.  It  is  sufficient  for  the 
matter  proposed,  not  for  the  proposition. 

These  attempted  answers  being  put  aside,  the  suffi- 
ciency of  the  proposition  is  found  to  be  in  reality  a  far 
less  simple  matter.  We  are  not  bound  to  take  into 
account  all  the  motives  which  may  induce  belief;  but 
we  must  include  all  that  are  universal  in  operation,  and 
so  belong  to  the  general  order  of  God's  ruling.  We  can 
bring  these  under  two  heads  :  the  inherent  reasonableness 
of  the  matter  proposed,  and  the  authority  of  the  pro- 
ponent. By  reasonableness  we  must  understand  not 
merely  a  superficial  probability,  but  a  far-reaching 
conformity  with  the  whole  order  of  creation,  in  which 
we  trace  the  working  of  the  Divine  Reason.  For  the 
present  purpose  this  reasonableness  must  be  such  as  to 
convince  not  only  some  specially  gifted  souls,  but  the 
understanding  and  conscience  of  the  ordinary  man.  It 
will  range  in  practice  from  the  analogy  with  nature 
worked  out  by  the  solid  thought  of  Butler,  to  the 
simplest  perception  of  something  in  the  gospel  corre- 
sponding to  a  need  felt  in  the  heart  of  man.  But  God 
does  not  require  any  one  to  be  convinced  by  such  reason- 
ableness alone  of  the  truth  of  things  outside  his  own 
experience.  There  is  added  the  authority  of  the  pro- 
ponent, which  is  the  Church.  "  I  should  not,"  says  St, 
Augustine,  "  believe  the  gospel,  did  not  the  authority  of 
the  Catholic  Church  move  me  thereto." ' 

These  much-debated  words  have  been  misunderstood 
chiefly  for  want  of  attention.      We  must   note   exactly 

'  Aug.,  Contr.Epist.  Fiindaniciiti,  c.  5  :  "  Evangtlio  non  credereni 
nisi  me  catholicae  ecclesiae  commoveret  auctorilas."     See  Note  B. 


TJie  Proposition  of  Faith  59 

what  St.  Augustine  says,  and  what  he  does  not  say.  He 
puts  forward  the  authority  of  the  Church  not  as  a  ground 
for  beUeving,  but  as  a  motive.  It  has  been  compared 
with  the  report  of  Philip  bringing  Nathanael  to  Christ, 
and  with  the  witness  of  the  Samaritan  woman  attracting 
her  fellow-townsmen,  who  afterwards  said,  "  Now  we 
believe,  not  for  thy  speaking  :  for  we  have  heard  for  our- 
selves and  know."  But  this  falls  short  of  St.  Augustine's 
meaning.  He  did  not  speak  of  the  Church  as  merely 
arousing  a  curiosity  which  is  satisfied  by  the  gospel.  The 
testimony  of  the  Church  is  one  of  the  causes  directly 
moving  men  to  believe.  The  nature  of  this  testimony 
we -have  already  considered  ;  we  are  now  concerned  with 
its  effect.  It  has  in  practice  the  effect  of  inducing  belief. 
Whether  we  regard  the  historical  testimony  of  the  whole 
Church  from  the  beginning,  or  the  common  assent  of 
Christians  at  any  given  time,  or  that  "  conversation 
in  the  bosom  of  the  Church,"  which  Hooker  puts 
prominently  forward,^  men  are  in  fact  drawn  to  the  faith 
and  sustained  therein  by  this  influence.  God  has  there- 
fore provided  means  by  which  his  truth  may  be  set 
before  men.  We  may  apply  to  revealed  religion  what 
St.  Paul  said  of  natural  religion,  that  God  has  not  left 
himself  without  witness.-  The  proposition  of  the  faith 
by  the  Church  is  ordinarily  sufficient  to  require  assent, 
and  to  impose  on  the  hearer  the  obligation  of  believing. 

The  authority  of  the  Church  is  not  the  ground  for 
believing.  There  is  one  only  ground  :  it  is  the  convic- 
tion of  the  disciple  that  God  has  taught  these  things 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.  If  the  authority  of  the 
Church  were  the  ground  for  believing,  it  would  follow 
that  a  new  doctrine  might  be  proposed  by  the  Church  to 
rank  equally  with  the  original  teaching  of  the  gospel. 
'  Hooker,  Works,  vol.  ii.  p.  95.  *  Acts  xiv.  17. 


6o  TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

But  this  we  have  seen  to  be  impossible.  The  proposition 
of  the  Church  is  Umited  to  the  setting  forth  of  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  a  form  inteUigible  and 
free  from  ambiguity.  In  practice  the  Church  is  Umited 
to  propounding  what  is  already  contained  in  Holy 
Scripture.  This  limitation  obviously  does  not  belong  to 
the  nature  of  things,  for  the  Church  was  preaching  the 
faith  before  the  Canon  of  the  New  Testament  was 
closed.  Nor  again  is  it  imposed  on  the  Church  by 
Divine  authority,  for  that  could  not  be  done  without 
express  revelation.  So  again  the  assertion  that  "  Holy 
Scripture  containeth  all  things  necessary  to  salvation," 
cannot  be  itself  a  truth  necessary  to  salvation  ;  else  it 
would  be  self-contradictory,  since  no  such  assertion  can 
be  found  in  Holy  Scripture.  The  assertion  is  true,  but 
it  must  not  be  confused  with  the  revealed  truths  of  the 
gospel.  It  is  the  recognition  of  a  fact ;  and  the 
sufficiency  of  Holy  Scripture  in  this  regard  being  a  fact, 
the  Church  renounces,  by  a  self-denying  ordinance,  the 
power  of  proposing  as  matter  of  faith  anything  which 
goes  beyond. 

Holy  Scripture,  I  have  said,  is  sufficient  for  the  matter 
proposed,  though  not  for  the  proposition.  This  does  not 
mean  that  nothing  more  is  required  of  the  Church  than 
to  place  the  Bible  before  the  world.  The  Rule  of  Faith, 
as  we  have  seen,  is  Holy  Scripture  interpreted  by  the 
Church.  The  faith  which  is  proposed  by  the  Church 
is  the  content  of  Holy  Scripture,  collected,  explained, 
guarded,  and  freed,  if  necessary,  from  ambiguity.  On 
the  other  hand,  not  everything  contained  in  Holy 
Scripture  is  equally  proposed.  There  are  parts  of  the 
Bible  the  meaning  of  which  is  far  from  clear,  and  which 
the  authority  of  the  Church  has  never  interpreted. 
Every  such  passage  has  in  fact  some  one  definite  meaning, 


The  Proposition  of  Faith  6i 

which  is  the  truth  ;  but  this  truth  is  not  proposed  as 
matter  of  beUef.  No  blame  therefore  attaches  to  those 
who  fail  to  apprehend  it.  Any  one  stands  condemned 
who  reads  into  such  an  obscure  passage  a  meaning- 
contradictory  to  a  known  truth ;  but  no  one  is  condemned 
merely  because  he  fails  to  draw  out  the  true  meaning. 
Nor  may  we  hope  that  such  obscurities  will  be  cleared 
up  in  the  future.  The  nature  of  the  Church's  witness 
forbids  this.  The  Church  does  not  propound  anything 
new  as  matter  of  faith,  but  only  declares  what  has  been 
taught  from  the  beginning.  A  novel  interpretation  may 
therefore  be  condemned ;  but  the  meaning  of  a  Scripture 
which  has  always  been  in  doubt  cannot  be  fixed  by 
authority. 

The  Proposition  of  Faith  is  thus  limited,  partly  by  the 
nature  of  things,  partly  by  a  humble  reserve.  But  in 
practice  the  teaching  of  the  Church  goes  beyond  the 
Proposition  of  Faith.  We  have  seen  the  Apostles  over- 
stepping this  limit.  St.  Paul  taught  some  things  of  his 
own  judgment,  not  by  revelation  of  the  Lord.  The  dis- 
tinction holds  good  for  all  time.  Not  only  matter  of 
faith  but  also  matter  of  opinion  is  put  forward  by  the 
Church,  sometimes  with  great  tenacity.  The  opinion, 
already  mentioned,  that  Holy  Scripture  contains  all 
things  necessary  to  salvation,  is  an  instance.  Another 
may  be  found  in  the  current  teaching  of  the  Church 
with  regard  to  the  inspiration  of  Scripture.  These 
doctrines  are  carefully  to  be  distinguished  on  the 
one  hand  from  those  positive  rules  which  the  Church 
imposes  by  way  of  discipline,  and  on  the  other  hand 
from  those  revealed  truths  of  which  the  Church  is  only 
the  recipient  and  proponent.  They  occupy  a  middle 
position,  depending  on  the  authority  of  the  Church  but 
not  being  the  expression  merely  of  the  corporate  will  of 


62  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine  ' 

the  Church,  They  are  the  result  of  an  attempt  to 
ascertain  truth  by  means  of  the  common  sense  of  the 
vv'hole  Christian  body,  guided  and  sustained  by  the  in- 
dwelling Spirit  of  God.  They  are  a  part  of  the  teaching 
of  the  Church,  though  not  strictly  speaking  a  part  of 
Christian  doctrine.  How  then  should  they  be  regarded  ? 
As  a  matter  of  discipline  the  Church  may  forbid  any  man 
to  contradict  them,  may  even  require  of  those  who  are 
to  be  admitted  to  the  teaching  office  entire  assent;  and 
apart  from  these  rules  of  discipline  the  grace  of  humility 
will  impel  the  faithful  to  acknowledge  at  least  the 
extreme  probability  of  what  is  taught  with  the  common 
consent  of  Christians.  But  this  obligation  of  humility  is 
not  to  be  confused  with  the  obligation  of  faith  arising 
from  the  proposition  of  Christian  doctrine. 

It  remains  to  consider  the  mode  of  this  proposition. 
The  Proposition  of  the  Church  is  commonly  described  as 
of  two  kinds,  ordinary  and  solemn.  By  the  Ordinary 
Proposition  of  the  Church  we  mean  the  exhibition  of 
Christian  doctrine  which  goes  on  day  by  day  continually. 
Those  who  have  their  conversation  in  the  bosom  of  the 
Church — to  revert  to  Hooker's  phrase — drink  in  per- 
petually the  knowledge  of  the  truth.  They  are  taught  by 
catechism,  by  custom,  and  by  the  exampleof  their  fellows. 
They  are  taught,  according  to  the  maxim  lex  oraiidi  lex 
credendi,  by  the  appointed  forms  of  worship.  The  Holy 
Scriptures  are  put  into  their  hands  and  are  expounded. 
Much  that  is  human,  much  that  is  local  and  peculiar, 
becomes  in  this  way  mingled  with  Divine  truth,  to  the 
point  sometimes  of  obscuring  it.  The  true  proposition 
is  found  in  that  which  is  universal  and  consistent. 
Accretions  are  warded  off  by  the  concurrence  of  all  parts 
of  the  Church,  the  witness  of  the  whole  Ecclcsia  dispcrsa. 
In    proportion    to  the   freedom    of  intercourse    among 


The  Proposition  of  Faith  6l 

Christians  the  purity  of  the  proposition  is  guarded.  The 
divisions  of  Christendom  weaken  tlie  proposition,  to  a  less 
degree  in  these  days  than  when  intercourse  depended 
more  on  personal  communication,  but  still  seriously ;  and 
as  the  proposition  is  weakened  so  also  is  the  obligation 
of  faith.  It  is  not  however  destroyed.  The  Ordinary 
Proposition  of  the  Church  maybe  identified  in  that  which 
is  taught  by  all  parts  of  the  Church  alike ;  and  to  the 
smiple  Christian  the  proposition  of  his  own  part  of  the 
Church  suttees. 

The  Solemn  Proposition  of  the  Church  is  required,  and 
is  attainable,  only  on  extraordinary  occasions.  It  is  a 
declaration,  by  a  Council  fairly  representing  the  whole 
Church,  of  what  is  believed  and  taught  as  Christian  truth. 
Such  a  Council  would  ideally  consist  of  all  the  bishops 
at  least  throughout  the  whole  world  —  the  Eccksia 
congregata ;  but  in  practice  no  such  gathering  has  ever 
been  possible.  A  Council  is  known  as  General  or 
Oecumenical,  whatever  its  numbers,  when  it  is  recognized 
as  being  fairly  representative.  Nor  is  it  possible  to  lay 
down  any  rule  as  to  what  will  constitute  such  representa- 
tion. The  general  acceptance  of  a  Council  alone  can 
determine  its  authority.  The  work  of  a  Council— I  do 
not  speak  here  of  disciplinary  canons  or  rules  for  the 
social  order  of  the  Church— is  to  gather  in  one  definition 
the  concurrent  witness  of  all  parts  of  the  Church.  It  is 
required  only  when  some  serious  innovation  or  heresy 
is  threatening  the  continuity  of  Christian  doctrine.  A 
conciliar  definition  is  not  more  certain  or  more  binding 
than  the  ordinary  proposition  of  the  Church.  In  itself 
indeed  it  is  less  binding.  The  decree  of  a  Council,  how- 
ever great  and  important,  is  valuable  only  as  declaring 
the  general  doctrine  of  the  Church  ;  if  it  run  counter  to 
this,  it  is  rejected.     The  first  Council  of  Nicaea,  in  the 


64  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

face  of  Arian  innovation,  declared  the  faith  of  the  Church 
in  the  consubstantiaUty  of  the  Son  of  God.  Some  years 
later  the  Council  of  Ariminium,  a  larger  body,  accepted 
a  statement  which  was  practically  Arian.  The  result  was 
only  a  temporary  confusion  and  trouble.  The  general 
teaching  of  the  Church  overrode  the  authority  of  the 
Council.  A  conciliar  definition  is  merely  a  solemn  mode 
of  putting  before  men  what  the  Church  believes  and 
teaches.  The  Solemn  Proposition  of  the  Church,  like 
the  ordinary  proposition,  is  not  the  ground  of  believing 
but  a  motive  to  belief.  The  dogmatic  definition  of 
Nicaea  or  Chalcedon  is  binding,  not  because  it  is  the 
decree  of  a  Council,  but  because  it  accurately  expresses 
the  doctrine  received  from  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

Such  definition  is  not  therefore  without  effect.  The 
proposition  being  more  solemn  appeals  more  strongly  to 
the  conscience ;  and  being  more  public,  leaves  the  less 
room  for  a  plea  of  ignorance.  It  follows  that  as  a  man 
is  bound  to  accept  the  truths  of  revelation  proposed  by 
the  Church,  so  he  is  in  particular  bound  to  believe  what 
is  solemnly  defined.  A  Council  cannot  make  that  revealed 
truth  which  was  not  revealed  truth  ;  but,  says  Bramhall, 
"  a  general  Council  may  make  that  revealed  truth  necessary 
to  be  believed  by  a  Christian  as  a  point  of  Faith,  which 
formerly  was  not  necessary  to  be  believed."  That  is  to 
say,  the  truth  being  brought  home  to  a  man,  he  is  bound 
to  receive  it.  Bramhall  defines  and  limits  the  obligation 
by  saying  that  "  when  a  general  Council  hath  determined 
any  controversy,  no  man  may  oppose  its  determination, 
but  every  one  is  bound  to  acquiesce  and  possess  his  soul 
in  patience,  though  he  be  not  convicted  in  his  conscience 
of  the  truth  of  their  sentence."  But  this  is  rather  a 
matter  of  Christian  discipline  than  of  faith.  Field  is 
perhaps  clearer.     It  is  not  necessary,  he  says,  "  expressly 


The  Proposition  of  Faith  65 

to  believe  whatsoever  the  council  hath  concluded,  though 
it  be  true,  unless  by  some  other  means  it  appear  unto  us 
to  be  true,  and  we  be  convinced  of  it  in  some  other  sort 
than  by  the  bare  determination  of  the  council  only.  But 
it  sufificeth  that  we  believe  it  impUcite^  and  in  praepara- 
tione  animi,  that  out  of  the  due  respect  we  bear  to  the 
council's  decree  we  dare  not  resolve  otherwise,  and  be 
ready  expressly  to  believe  it,  if  it  shall  be  made  to 
appear  unto  us."  By  the  judgments  of  these  two  great 
English  divines  I  am  content  to  abide.  ^ 

So  much  we  may  say  of  the  Proposition  of  Faith  by  the 
Church,  ordinary  and  solemn.  But  the  teaching  of  the 
Church  is  sometimes  spoken  of  inaccurately  in  a  more 
extended  sense,  being  taken  to  mean  all  that  is  taught 
by  any  within  the  Church.  This  may  obviously  include 
some  erroneous  teaching,  and  much  that  is  doubtful ;  for 
by  no  means  all  questions  are  determined  by  the  authority 
of  the  Church,  and  mistaken  opinions  even  about  those 
which  have  been  determined  are  not  easily  eradicated. 
Questions  that  have  not  been  determined  are  known  as 
open  questions.  Upon  these,  individual  teachers  may 
give  divergent  answers,  and  if  the  teaching  function  were 
in  no  way  organized,  there  would  be  nothing  more  to  say. 
But  theology  is  an  organized  science.  We  must  be  care- 
ful here  to  see  exactly  what  we  mean.  Theology  is  the 
science  of  revelation.  It  is  the  orderly  systematic  exposi- 
tion of  revealed  truth  as  proposed  in  definitions  of  faith, 
and  the  orderly  systematic  treatment  of  open  questions. 
Theologians,  like  the  students  of  other  sciences,  maintain 
continual  intercourse,  mutually  informing  and  correcting 
one  another.     The  science  of  theology  becomes  in  this 

'  Bramhall,  JForis,  vol.    ii.  pp.  90,  91  ;  Field,    0/  the  CJmrch, 
bk.  V.  c.  51,  vol.  iv.  p.  60,  ed.  1852. 

F 


66  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

way  a  certain  compensation  for  the  divisions  of  Christen- 
dom.    A  theologian  is  valued,  not  because  he  belongs  to 
this  or  that  communion,  but  only  because  of  his  know- 
ledge.    It  is  necessary  to  make  allowance  for  prejudices, 
due  to  his  ecclesiastical  position,  which  may  affect  his 
judgment ;  but  this  allowance  made,  his  knowledge  and 
skill  contribute  their  share  to  the  science  common  to  all 
his   fellows  throughout  the  world.      There  is   therefore 
a    scientific    tradition    of    theological    learning,    partly 
uniform,    partly  controversial ;    and  that    which  is   uni- 
form, since  it  is  current  everywhere,  may  easily  be  con- 
fused   with    the    teaching    of    the    Church.      We    must 
therefore  be  on  the  watch  carefully  to  distinguish  be- 
tween the  teaching  of  the  Church  and  the  teaching  of 
theologians. 

How  should  we  regard  the  teaching  of  theologians  ? 
The  question  is  not  difficult  to  answer.  Theologians 
are  scientific  experts.  Their  authority  is  exactly  that  of 
any  other  experts  in  their  own  science.  'Wliere  they  are 
unanimous,  it  is  the  extreme  of  rashness  for  any  who 
are  not  expert  to  dissent.  Where  a  great  majority  of 
them  is  agreed,  it  is  still  rash  to  follow  the  dissentient 
minority,  though  this  minority  may  possibly  be  in  the 
right.  But  rash  and  reckless  speculation  or  an  obstinate 
adherence  to  personal  opinions,  in  a  matter  so  important 
as  religion,  is  a  thing  to  be  discouraged.  On  the  other 
hand,  no  one  is  bound  in  conscience  to  believe  any 
speculative  opinion,  however  strongly  supported  by  expert 
authority.  An  opinion  therefore  which  runs  counter  to 
the  general  trend  of  theological  teaching  is  condemned, 
not  as  false  or  heretical,  but  as  rash.  It  may  even  be 
right  for  the  Church,  by  way  of  discipline,  to  forbid  men 
publicly  to  maintain  such  an  opinion.  The  Church  of 
England  has  thus  adjudged  that  a  certain  opinion  about 


The  Proposition  of  Faith  6^ 

good  works  of  supererogation  "  cannot  be  taught  without 
arrogance  and  impiety."  ^ 

Of  special  importance  is  that  part  of  theological  science 
which  deals  with  practical  duties.  The  moral  teaching 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  given  in  the  form  not  of 
minute  and  detailed  precepts,  but  of  wide  far-reaching 
principles.  These  are  preserved  unchangeable  with  the 
rest  of  the  Christian  tradition,  interpreted,  if  need  be, 
and  proposed  to  men  by  the  Church.  The  whole 
Christian  doctrine  so  proposed  is  sometimes  divided 
under  the  heads  of  Faith  and  Morals ;  but  the  distinction 
is  not  well  marked,  since  the  teaching  under  both  heads 
alike  is  received  by  faith.  The  principles  of  moral 
action  are  thus  part  of  the  Proposition  of  Faith.  To 
these  are  added  certain  precepts  of  the  Church,  having 
the  same  authority  which  belongs,  as  we  have  seen,  to 
all  teaching  of  the  Church  that  goes  beyond  the  Proposi- 
tion of  Faith.  That  is  to  say,  these  precepts  may  not  be 
proposed  as  necessary  to  salvation,  but  they  impose  a 
grave  responsibility  on  any  Christian  who  neglects  them. 
There  remains  an  important  work  for  theologians.  It 
is  the  application  of  the  precepts  of  the  gospel  and  of 
the  Church  to  particular  cases.  The  function  of  a 
theologian  is  to  consider  exceptional  circumstances  and  to 
frame  rules  of  conduct  for  individuals.  Moral  theology 
is  the  systematic  study  of  practical  religion  ;  that  branch 
of  it  which  deals  with  particular  cases  is  known  as 
Casuistry.  It  is  a  science  in  the  study  of  which,  even 
more  than  in  other  branches  of  theology,  there  is  needed 
not  only  skill  but  a  pure  adhesion  to  the  spirit  of  true 
religion.  The  conclusions  of  theologians  in  this  regard 
have  the  same  kind  of  authority  as  in  other  matters. 
They  establish  in  varying  degrees  a  probability  that 
'  Articles  of  Religion,  'Ho,  \\y. 


68  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

what  is  recommended  is  the  right  or  at  least  the  wiser 
com'se  of  action.  And  since  probabiUty  is,  in  Butler's 
phrase,  the  guide  of  life,  the  conclusions  of  moral  theology 
are  valuable  as  means  for  informing  the  conscience. 
They  are  this,  but  they  are  no  more. 

A  statement  of  Christian  doctrine  will  therefore  include 
in  the  first  place  those  truths  of  the  gospel  which  are 
defined  and  set  before  men  by  the  Church  in  the  Pro- 
position of  Faith.  To  these  we  must  add  all  that  is 
taught  by  the  Church,  not  as  Divine  truth  which  men 
are  bound  to  believe,  but  as  opinion  so  highly  probable 
as  not  to  be  rejected  without  dangerous  temerity.  Of 
far  less  importance,  but  not  to  be  neglected,  are  the 
opinions  of  theologians  about  open  questions.  The 
systematic  treatment  of  these  topics  is  the  sum  of 
theological  science. 

My  object  is  to  exhibit  these  things  in  the  simplest 
possible  form.  I  shall  try  to  state  what  is  generally 
received  and  taught  as  the  doctrine  of  Christ.  I  shall 
use  for  this  purpose  the  language  of  the  Church,  but 
shall  avoid  the  use  of  terms  which  belong  only  to  the 
technical  language  of  theology.  The  more  important 
errors  opposed  to  this  doctrine  will  be  indicated.  I  shall 
further  aim  at  stating,  with  proper  distinction,  what  is 
taught  on  the  authority  of  the  Church  ;  and  where  it 
seems  to  be  called  for,  I  will  try  to  give  what  is  most 
probable  in  theological  opinion.  It  will  sometimes  be 
w-ell  to  mention  even  what  stands  on  a  lower  ground  of 
probability.  In  treating  so  large  a  matter  within  so  brief 
a  compass,  I  must  often  say  what  seems  to  me  true 
without  giving  my  reasons ;  I  may  often  seem  to  speak 
with  certainty  where  doubt  or  hesitation  might  be 
expected.  I  give  only  what  I  have  received.  Error 
may  be  in  the  measure  of  the  recipient ;  for  that  I  bear 


The  Proposition  of  Faith  69 

the  blame,  protesting  only  that  the  error  is  not  wilful. 
If  I  say  anything  amiss,  I  desire  the  condemnation  of 
the  offence,  and  pardon  only  for  the  offender.  I  therefore 
venture  to  make  my  own  the  words  of  Bramhall —  ^ 

"  I  submit  myself  and  my  poor  endeavours,  first,  to 
the  judgment  of  the  Catholic  CEcumenical  essential 
Church.  .  .  .  And  if  I  should  mistake  the  right  Catholic 
Church  out  of  human  frailty  or  ignorance,  ...  I  do  im- 
plicitly and  in  the  preparation  of  my  mind  submit  myself 
to  the  true  Catholic  Church,  the  spouse  of  Christ,  the 
mother  of  the  Saints,  the  pillar  of  truth.  And  seeing  my 
adherence  is  firmer  to  the  infallible  rule  of  Faith,  that  is, 
the  Holy  Scriptures  interpreted  by  the  Catholic  Church, 
than  to  mine  own  private  judgment  or  opinions  ;  although 
I  should  unwittingly  fall  into  an  error,  yet  this  cordial 
submission  is  an  implicit  retractation  thereof,  and  I  am 
confident  will  be  so  accepted  by  the  Father  of  Mercies, 
both  from  me  and  all  others  who  seriously  and  sincerely 
do  seek  after  peace  and  truth. 

"  Likewise  I  submit  myself  to  the  representative 
Church,  that  is,  a  free  general  Council,  or  so  general  as 
can  be  procured;  and  until  then,  to  the  Church  of 
England,  wherein  I  was  baptized,  or  to  a  national 
English  Synod :  to  the  determination  of  all  which,  and 
each  of  them  respectively,  according  to  the  distinct 
degrees  of  their  authority,  I  yield  a  conformity  and 
compliance,  or  at  the  least,  and  to  the  lowest  of  them, 
an  acquiescence." 

'  Bramhall,  Works,  vol.  ii.  p.  22. 


CHAPTER   1 

OF    GOD    AND    CREATION 

Sect.  I.— The  Bcwg  of  God 

There  is  One  eternal  God.  We  mean  by  this  a  Being, 
without  cause,  without  beginning,  who  is  himself  the 
cause  of  all  things  that  have  had  beginning,  that  is,  of  all 
things  that  are  not  Himself.  He  is  known  as  such,  in 
some  measure,  by  the  common  sense  of  mankind,  since 
all  things  in  our  experience  are  referred  to  some  cause, 
which  is  itself  due  to  some  other  cause ;  and  so  we  pro- 
ceed until  we  are  brought  up  to  a  cause  which  is  not 
itself  caused  in  any  way.  It  is  not  impossible  to  imagine 
the  existence  of  many  such  primary  causes  ;  but  we 
become  by  experience  so  convinced  of  the  unity  of  the 
visible  world,  that  we  are  driven  to  refer  all  to  one  cause. 
For  if  we  imagine  several  primary  causes,  we  are  com- 
pelled to  refer  the  unity  of  their  action  to  a  common 
controlling  force;  but  this  is  a  common  cause  behind 
them,  which  alone  is  primary.  A  certain  knowledge  of 
God  is  therefore  natural  to  man.  That  which  may  be 
known  of  God,  says  St.  Paul,  is  manifest  in  men  ;  it  is  a 
fact  of  their  consciousness.^ 

*  Rom.  i.  19.  Joh.  Damasc,  De  Fid.  Orthod.,  i.  i  :  no<r»  -yap 
7]  yvuais  Tov  flvai  Qeby  vn'  atirov  (pvfftKws  fyKaTeCTrapTai.  See 
Introduction,  p.  49. 

70 


The  Being  of  God  yi 

This  does  not  mean  that  all  men  know  God,  or 
recognize  the  necessity  of  this  one  cause  of  all  things  ; 
but  that  nature  affords  sufficient  evidence  of  his  being 
to  those  who  seek.  The  Being  of  God  and  the  Unity  of 
God  are  therefore  truths  of  natural  religion.  They  are 
not,  strictly  speaking,  articles  of  the  Christian  Faith. 
They  are,  as  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  says,  preambles  to  the 
Faith ;  ^  that  is  to  say,  they  are  presupposed  in  the 
delivery  of  Christian  doctrine.  For  unless  belief  in  God 
go  before,  nothing  can  be  received  as  revealed  by  him. 
Such  belief,  being  assumed  as  the  basis  of  Christian 
doctrine,  must  be  guarded  against  perversion  or  mis- 
understanding which  would  falsify  all  that  is  built  upon 
it.  We  must  therefore  be  careful  to  see  what  we  mean 
by  the  Being  and  Unity  of  God. 

Being  and  Unity  are  alike  metaphysical  terms ;  that 
is  to  say,  they  are  employed  in  the  scientific  analysis  of 
human  knowledge.  But  the  knowledge  is  prior  to  its 
analysis,  and  the  fact  which  is  known  is  prior  to  the 
knowledge.  We  are  concerned  with  the  fact ;  we  use 
the  results  of  metaphysic  only  for  the  sake  of  clear  under- 
standing. The  truth  that  we  have  to  express  is  the 
simple  fact  that  God  is.  And  this  is  an  unchanging  fact. 
The  peculiar  Name  of  God  used  in  the  revelation  of  the 
Old  Testament,  i-h-v-h,  the  pronunciation  of  which 
is  uncertain,  appears  to  bean  expression  of  this  fact;  and 
the  paraphrase  of  the  Name  given  to  Moses  in  Horeb  was 
rendered  by  the  Greek  interpreters,  in  the  language  of 
philosophy,  The  Being.^  Now  Being,  in  this  sense, 
excludes  the  idea  of  beginning  or  end;  it  includes  the 
idea  of  self-existence  or  self-origination,^  which  is  foreign 
to  all  things  that  have  beginning.     For  all  things  that 

'  Summa  TheoL,  i.  2.  2.  -  'O  "XIN,  Exod.  iii.  14. 

^  Latin  theologians  use  the  term  ascitas,  i.q.  a  se  esse. 


J 2  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

begin  to  be,  or  come  into  being,  have  a  cause 'prior  to 
themselves,  and  therefore  external  to  themselves.  This 
unalterable  Being  of  God  we  feebly  express  by  saying 
that  he  is  Eternal.  In  so  using  the  word  we  must 
remember  that  it  means  nothing  less  than  this.  It  does 
not  signify  an  inconceivable  immeasurable  duration.  It 
signifies  unalterable  Being  in  which,  since  there  is  no 
beginning,  no  end,  neither  is  there  any  middle  or  other 
division  of  extent ;  in  which  therefore  there  is  no  room 
for  the  idea  of  successive  moments,  no  duration  or  lapse 
of  time.  In  this  Being  there  is  no  past  or  future  ;  no 
present  even,  if  this  be  regarded  as  a  passing  moment. 

By  the  Unity  of  God  we  do  not  mean  merely  the 
negation  of  plurality.  We  do  not  mean  that  he  is  unique, 
or  the  only  being  of  the  kind.  In  this  imperfect  sense 
the  Unity  of  God  was  first  proclaimed  in  revelation.  He 
was  declared  to  have  no  equal,  whether  rival  or  partner. 
But  this  teaching  was  only  a  preparation  for  more  perfect 
knowledge,  and  in  itself  it  corrects  only  a  crude  form  of 
misbelief.  Neither  do  we  say  that  God  is  One,  in  the 
sense  in  which  every  several  thing  is  one  among  many, 
by  which  we  mean  that  it  is  identically  itself  and  not 
another.  We  can  say  this  of  God,  but  we  are  far  from 
expressing  the  true  meaning  of  his  Unity.  Nor  again 
may  we  say  that  he  is  One,  in  the  sense  that  a  multitude 
is  one.  We  can  speak  of  one  in  many  and  many  in  one, 
either  numerically,  as  a  heap  of  stones  is  one  heap,  or 
logically,  as  humanity  is  one  in  many  individuals ;  but 
there  is  no  place  for  this  sense  of  unity  in  our  conception 
of  God.  Nor  yet  again  may  we  say  that  he  is  One  as 
being  the  total  sum  of  all  things.  Every  total  has  an  unity 
of  its  own.  The  Universe  is  in  this  sense  one  ;  but  the 
Universe  is  not  God.  The  things  that  are  caused  do  not 
in  their  sum  make  up  the  cause  of  their  coming  into  being. 


The  Being  of  God  73 

This  last  conception  however,  though  false,  is  an 
approximation  to  the  truth.  It  is  false  because  it  inverts 
the  order  of  fact.  We  may  not  say  that  All  is  God,  but 
we  may  say  that  God  is  All,^  There  is  a  shadow  of  this 
truth  in  the  reiterated  phrase  of  Isaiah,  "  I  am  the  first, 
and  I  am  the  last." "  It  finds  perfect  expression  in  the 
teaching  of  St.  Paul  that  "  in  him  were  all  things  created, 
in  the  heavens  and  upon  the  earth,  things  visible  and 
things  invisible,"  and  that  "  all  things  have  been  created 
through  him  and  unto  him  ;  and  he  is  before  all  things, 
and  in  him  all  things  hold  together."  At  an  early  stage 
of  revelation  it  had  been  said,  "  Behold,  heaven  and  the 
heaven  of  heavens  cannot  contain  thee."  It  was  now 
declared  that  the  whole  universe  is  in  some  sort  contained 
in  God,  and  he  is  beyond  the  universe ;  he  is  AU.^  In  the 
language  of  philosophy  we  say  that  God  is  infinite.  We 
do  not  mean  the  abstract  infinity  which  is  merely  the 
negation  of  limit,  nor  the  lower  mathematical  infinity 
which  is  immeasurable  extension,  but  the  Infinite  Being 
who  comprehends  all  in  one,  who  is  described  in  the 
imagery  of  prophecy  as  holding  heaven  and  earth  in  the 
hollow  of  his  hand,  who  is  the  fulness  that  filleth  all  in 
all,  who  is  above  all  as  well  as  in  all.  Now  the  most 
perfect  unity  is  the  unity  of  the  Infinite.^ 

'  Ta  iravTa  iv  iraaiv,  I  Cor.  xv.  28 ;  Ta  Tvavra  kol  eV  iraaiv, 
Col.  iii.  II.  St.  Paul  adapts  the  phrase  on  each  occasion  to  his 
immediate  purpose. 

-  Isa.  xli.  4  ;  xliv.  6  ;  xlviii.  12.  The  sin  of  Babylon,  saj'ing  in  her 
heart,  "I  am,  and  there  is  none  else  beside  me"  (Isa.  xlvii.  10), 
is  the  sin  of  human  pride  aping  the  universality  of  God.  The  same 
sin  is  attributed  to  Nineveh  in  Zeph.  ii.  15. 

^  Col.  i.  16,  17  ;  I  Kings  viii.  27. 

■•  Observe  the  word  ■jrX.y)po>fxa,  abused  by  Pantheism,  but  rescued 
to  Christian  use  by  St.  Paul  (Eph.  i.  23  ;  Col.  i.  19 ;  ii.  9).  On 
the  use  of  terms  of  philosophy  in  theology  it  was  acutely  said  by 


74         The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

This  one  eternal  God  is  pure  Spirit.  We  are  here 
using  a  term  derived  from  our  natural  knowledge.  The 
distinction  of  matter  and  spirit  is  arrived  at  by  our 
consciousness  and  experience  of  ourselves.  To  express 
that  which  is  not  material  we  borrow  the  word  spirit, 
the  name  of  the  breath  from  the  lungs,  using  it  to 
signify  a  mode  of  existence  which  the  human  mind  has 
learnt  to  regard  as  distinct  and  even  separable  from  that 
of  the  body.^  This  mode  of  existence  is  naturally  attri- 
buted to  God.  Conscious  of  the  spiritual  faculty  of  will, 
and  knowing  that  our  own  will  is,  within  ourselves,  the 
ultimate  cause  of  all  that  we  do,  we  are  driven  to  assume 
that  a  like  cause  of  all  things  that  are  made  is  to  be 
found  in  the  will  of  a  supreme  Spirit.  The  postulate 
of  natural  religion  is  confirmed  by  Revelation,  which 
adds  the  knowledge  that  God,  the  supreme  Spirit,  is  not 
eternally  immanent  in  the  material  universe  as  in  a  body, 
but  is  the  cause  of  this  universe,  being  himself  eternally 
pure  Spirit. 

The  truth  of  the  Being  and  Unity  of  God  is  contested 
by  various  opinions,  which  we  may  briefly  indicate.  They 
can  be  reduced  to  three  heads — Dualism,  Monism,  and 
Polytheism. 

Dualism  is  a  belief  in  two  first  principles.  These  are 
generally  distinguished  as  good  and  evil,  the  conception 
of  two  principles  or  first  causes  being  due  to  the 
difficulty  of  understanding  how  the  evil  that  is  in  the 
world  can  be  traced  to  a  good  cause,  or  the  good  to  an 

Aubrey  Moore,  "Even  when  religion  nnd  philosophy  both  agree  to 
speak  of  God  as  '  the  Infinite,'  for  the  one  it  is  an  adjective,  for 
the  other  a  substantive"  i^Lux  lilnndi,  p.  65  ;  loth  ed.). 

•  The  Greek  itvivtxa.  and  the  Latin  spiritus  have  the  same 
history.  That  of  the  English  ghost,  used  as  their  equivalent,  is 
obscure. 


The  Being  of  God  75 

evil  cause.  This  belief,  which  had  existed  for  ages  in 
the  East,  entered  into  active  competition  with  Christianity 
in  the  form  of  Manichaeism,  so  called  from  the  Persian 
teacher  Manes.  Borrowing  some  Christian  featm'es,  it 
spread  widely  in  the  fourth  century,  when  St,  Augustine 
passed  several  years  of  his  youth  under  its  influence.  It 
held  its  own  obscurely  in  various  parts  of  Christendom, 
until  in  the  twelfth  century  it  became  dominant  in 
Southern  France  and  Northern  Italy  among  the  sectaries 
known  as  the  Albigenses,  In  practice  the  distinction  of 
good  and  evil  is  commonly  confused  with  the  distinction 
of  matter  and  spirit,  the  former  being  regarded  as  the 
creature  of  the  evil  principle,  and  absolutely  subject  to 
its  control.  In  this  form  dualism  is  found  to  lend  itself 
equally  to  an  austere  morality  combined  with  severe  mor- 
tification of  the  body,  and  to  unbridled  licentiousness 
founded  on  contempt  of  the  body  and  its  functions  as 
naturally  and  inevitably  evil. 

Monism  is  in  philosophy  and  religion  the  converse  of 
dualism.  Morally,  it  asserts  that  evil  does  not  exist,  that 
which  we  call  evil  being  only  a  lesser  degree  of  good,  or 
seeming  evil  because  of  an  imperfect  apprehension. 
Intellectually,  it  is  the  denial  of  the  distinction  of  matter 
and  spirit.  As  such  it  takes  two  forms.  Materialism  is 
the  denial  of  spiritual  existence,  and  is  therefore  properly 
atheistic  \  what  we  call  mind  or  spirit  is  thought  of  only 
as  a  function  of  matter.  Pantheism,  which  regards  all 
material  things  and  all  created  spirit  as  being  essentially 
a  part  of  the  Divine  nature,  we  shall  consider  when  we 
come  to  the  doctrine  of  Creation. 

Polytheism  ought,  strictly  speaking,  to  mean  belief  in 
a  multiplicity  of  first  causes.  But  it  may  be  doubted 
whether  any  human  mind  is  capable  of  resting  consciously 
in  such  a  belief     Polytheism  has  many  roots  in  thought 


'j6         The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

and  imagination.  For  our  purpose  it  is  sufficient  to  say 
that  it  indicates  either  an  arrest  of  the  tendency  of  the 
mind  to  seek  a  first  cause,  or  else  a  straining  of  that 
distinction  between  the  Divine  attributes  which  we  shall 
shortly  consider.  But  it  must  be  observed  that  an 
apparent  and  professed  Polytheism  is  not  inconsistent 
with  a  genuine  belief  in  the  Divine  Unity.  When  men's 
thoughts  have  progressed  beyond  their  practice,  they  see 
behind  the  Pantheon  of  popular  religion  the  uniform 
Power  and  Wisdom  which  is  God.  Such  belief  is  not 
properly  polytheistic ;  the  deities  of  mythology  may  still 
be  acknowledged,  but  they  are  conceived  as  resting  in  a 
lower  plane  of  spiritual  existence.  It  is  interesting  to 
observe  that  the  Greek  and  Latin  fathers  of  the  Church 
seem  to  have  always  regarded  them  as  having  a  real 
existence  of  this  kind,  classing  them  as  demons. 

Sect.  II. —  The  Holy  Trinity 

The  One  Eternal  God  is  in  a  Trinity  of  Persons,  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  He  is  revealed 
to  us  as  eternal  Love.  But  love  is  a  relation  between 
persons.  Therefore  to  say  that  God  is  Love  is  to  say 
that  he  is  not  one  only  Person.  The  doctrine  of  the 
Holy  Trinity  is  not  set  out  in  express  words  of  Scripture, 
but  the  truth  is  revealed,  and  the  doctrine  gradually 
formulated  by  the  Church  was  expressed  in  appropriate 
words  in  answer  to  questions  that  were  raised  about  the 
meaning  of  revelation. 

The  first  Person  of  the  Holy  Trinity  is  the  Father. 
We  use  the  word  here  not  as  when  we  speak  of  the 
Fatherhood  of  God  in  relation  to  his  creatures,  but  as 
expressing  a  relation  within  the  Divine  Nature.  The 
word   so   used    implies    in    the    first    place    origin    or 


The  Holy  Trinity  77 

begetting,  and  secondarily  the  love  which  is  natural  to 
that  relation.  In  this  sense  the  Father  is  spoken  of  as 
the  Fount  of  Godhead,  eternally  flowing  and  eternally 
producing. 

The  second  Person  of  the  Holy  Trinity  is  the  Son. 
This  word  again  is  used  only  to  express  the  relation  of 
begetting,  and  the  love  which  is  proper  thereto.  It  is 
appropriate,  but  not  exclusively  appropriate.  As  if  to 
guard  us  from  too  narrow  a  conception  of  the  relation, 
we  find  another  term  also  used ;  the  Son  is  known  as  the 
Word.  This  term,  like  the  other,  is  borrowed  from  our 
human  experience,  which  has  a  faint  resemblance  to 
the  Divine  activity.  It  is  taken  from  the  language  of 
philosophy.  In  our  experience  Word  is  Thought  formed 
within  the  mind  and  brought  forth  in  speech.  This 
conception,  applied  to  the  Divine  Nature,  gave  the 
doctrine  of  the  Word  or  Wisdom  of  God  which  is  found 
in  the  later  'Jewish  writings,  and  notably  in  Philo  of 
Alexandria,  The  application  is  justified,  and  the  con- 
ception cleared  from  error,  in  the  Christian  revelation. 

The  third  Person  of  the  Holy  Trinity  is  the  Holy 
Ghost.  God  is  pure  Spirit ;  we  have  seen  how  the  word 
is  used  of  the  Divine  Being,  but  the  poverty  of  language 
compels  us  to  use  it  also  to  express  a  relation  of  the 
Divine  Persons.  In  our  own  experience  we  use  it  for 
the  impulse  or  movement  of  the  soul  when  bent  on  doing 
something  j  we  speak  of  acting  with  spirit,  of  being  stirred 
by  a  spirit  of  adventure,  and  so  forth.  Applying  as  usual 
our  own  language  to  Divine  things,  we  speak  in  a  similar 
sense  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  We  mean  the  going  forth  of 
the  Divine  activity.^ 

•  So  St.  Thomas  Aquinas,  Sum.  Tkeol.,  i.  27.  4  :  "  Quo  nomine 
quaedam  vitalis  motio  et  impulsio  designatur  ;  prout  aliquis  ex  amore 
dicitur  moveri  vel  impelli  ad  aliquid  faciendum." 


78  TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

We  must  consider  tlie  meaning  of  the  word  Person  as 
here  used.  It  is  a  Latin  equivalent  of  the  Greek 
Hypostasis.  This  word  in  popular  Greek  signified  some- 
thing soHd  and  firm ;  it  was  adopted  in  the  language  of 
philosophy  to  signify  the  reality  underlying  an  appearance 
or  a  mental  conception.  Thus  it  was  not  far  removed  in 
sense  from  Being  or  Substance}  When  the  questionings  of 
heresy  made  it  necessary  to  define  Christian  truth,  these 
terms  were  borrowed  from  philosophy,  but  used  in  a  way  so 
far  new  as  to  express  things  hitherto  unknown.  The  word 
Being  or  Substance  was  by  established  usage  appropriated 
to  express  the  One  unchanging  God.  To  express  the 
severalty  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  and  the  Holy 
Ghost,  a  mode  of  existence  revealed  with  sufficient  clear- 
ness but  foreign  to  all  human  experience  and  therefore  to 
all  current  language,  the  word  Hypostasis  was  after  some 
hesitation  adopted.  There  were  some  to  whom  it  seemed 
dangerous  to  speak  of  three  Hypostases  in  the  Divine 
Being ;  it  might  imply  too  separate  an  existence.  This 
danger  was  partly  averted  by  the  use  of  a  countervailing 
term  testifying  to  the  Divine  Unity.  The  three 
Hypostases  were  declared  to  be  Con  substantial.,  existing 
in  one  only  Substance  or  Being.- 

'  Ovffia,  substance,  is  the  pure  being  of  that  which  is.  'TiroVToo-ir, 
literally  under-standing,  was  originally  the  solid  sediment  in  liquor, 
or  the  base  of  a  building  ;  morally,  a  fixed  resolve.  The  transition 
to  the  philosophic  sense  Is  obvious.  In  the  New  Testament  it 
stands  for  a  mingled  moral  and  mental  assurance  (2  Cor.  ix.  4 ; 
Heb.  iii.  14;  xi.  i).  In  Ileb.  i.  3  St.  Athanasius  makes  it  as 
equivalent  to  ovcria  [contr.  Ar.  iv.  Op.  tom.  i.  p.  516,  ed.  Colon). 
So  the  ^'ulg.  and  the  English  R.V. 

-  Even  the  word  ofj-oovaios,  consubstantial,  which  at  the  Council 
of  Nicaea  became  the  watchword  of  the  faith,  had  been  rejected  at 
the  Council  of  Antioch,  A.D,  269,  which  condemned  Paul  of  Samo- 
sata.     It  was  then  used  in  the  sense  in  which  we  say  that  two  things 


The  Holy   Trinity  79 

The  word  Hypostasis,  thus  used,  is  represented  in  Latin 
by  Persona.  This  term  also  was  not  accepted  without 
hesitation,  the  objection  to  it  being  the  converse  of  that 
alleged  against  the  Greek  term.  The  woxik persona,  being 
commonly  used  for  a  part  or  character  sustained  by  a 
man  either  temporarily  or  permanently,  might  seem  to 
suggest,  when  used  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  merely  three 
modes  of  activity  in  the  One  God.  The  Son  would  then 
be  the  Father,  only  acting  in  a  different  manner,  and  the 
Holy  Ghost  likewise.  This  was,  in  fact,  the  teaching  of 
Sabellius,  who  with  his  followers  employed  the  word  in 
this  sense.  It  was  therefore  suspect.  Rescued  to  ortho- 
doxy, it  acquired  a  fixed  and  definite  meaning.  This 
was  settled  by  the  authority  of  Boethius,  who  in  the  fifth 
century  dominated  all  the  schools  of  Latin  Christendom. 
Regretting  the  lack  of  a  more  suitable  word  in  the  Latin 
language,  he  defined  Persona  as  naturae  rationahilis 
individua  substantia,  where  individiia  substa)itia  stands  for 
the  exact  equivalent  of  hypostasis  in  its  more  general 
sense,  and  there  is  added  the  difference  of  rationality.^ 

We  are  compelled  to  engage  in  this  study  of  words  by 
the  need  of  a  clear  understanding  of  the  terms,  utterly 
inadequate  as  they  are,  in  which  we  express  what  is 
revealed  about  the  Divine  Nature.     If  their  sense  be  not 

of  the  same  kind  have  a  common  substance  (the  substantia  sectmda 
of  metaphysics),  as  two  men  the  common  substance  of  humanity.  See 
the  argument  in  Athanas.  De  Synodis  ;  torn.  i.  p.  919. 

'  Boethius,  De  diiabiis  Naturis,  p.  1206,  ed.  Basil,  1570.  We 
should  perhaps  read  rationalis.  He  observes  that  the  Greeks  also 
used  the  corresponding  word  irpSa-unrov  in  this  sense,  but  preferred 
the  less  ambiguous  term,  and  explains,  "  Nos  vero  per  inopiani 
significantium  vocum  translativam  retinuimus  nuncupationem,  earn 
quam  illi  inroaraaiv  dicunt  personam  vocanles,  sed  peritior  Graecia 
sermonum  inriaracnv  vocat  individuam  substantiam."  Substantia, 
ovcria,  is  pure  being  ;  individua  substantia  is  distinct  existence. 


8o  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

carefully  guarded,  the  watchwords  of  right  belief  become 
the  cause  of  error.  If,  for  example,  the  word  Person  be 
carelessly  understood  in  the  sense  now  current  of 
personality,  an  heretical  meaning  will  be  read  into  the 
formularies  of  faith,  which  with  a  strange  irony  will  be 
the  exact  opposite  of  the  Sabellian  sense  that  once  hung 
about  the  Latin  word.  In  modern  language  personality  is 
taken  to  be  determined  by  self-consciousness  and  by  the 
power  of  will.  In  this  modern  sense  we  correctly  speak 
of  the  One  God  as  a  Personal  Being,  not  an  impersonal 
force ;  but  if  we  read  this  meaning  into  the  distinction  of 
the  three  Divine  Persons,  we  make  three  distinct  Beings, 
having  three  distinct  Wills ;  that  is  to  say,  three  Gods. 
Using  the  words  which  the  practice  of  Christendom 
has  consecrated  to  the  expression  of  Divine  things,  we 
must  be  careful  to  use  them  in  the  sense  intended  by 
those  who  brought  them  into  use. 

We  believe  therefore  in  one  eternal  undivided  Being 
or  Substance  of  rational  and  spiritual  nature ;  our  own 
nature  being  so  far  similar  that  we  can,  however  im- 
perfectly, apprehend  what  is  revealed  on  this  head,  and 
can  use  the  terms  of  our  own  nature,  by  an  imperfect 
analogy,  in  speaking  of  the  Divine  Nature.  We  believe 
this  one  Divine  Nature  to  exist,  not  like  the  human  nature 
of  each  several  man  in  one  single  hypostasis  or  person,  but 
in  three  distinct  Persons,  each  Person  being  whole, 
eternal,  undivided  God.  The  Father  is  not  the  Son,  the 
Son  is  not  the  Holy  Ghost,  the  Holy  Ghost  is  not  the 
Father.  The  Father  is  God,  the  Son  is  God,  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  God ;  but  we  cannot  say  that  God  is  the  Father, 
or  God  is  the  Son;  we  can  only  say  that  God  is  the 
Father,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  This  is  the  Name 
of  God,  revealed  by  Jesus  Christ,  the  Name  into  which 
we  are  baptized  as  sons  of  God.      The  Name  of  God 


The  Holy   Trinity  8i 

given  by  revelation  in  the  Old  Testament  bore  witness  to 
the  eternal  Unity ;  the  Name  given  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment bears  witness  to  the  eternal  Trinity. 

The  Persons  of  the  Holy  Trinity  are  distinguished  by 
mutual  relations.  The  Father  is  the  Begetter,  the  Son  is 
the  Begotten  ;  or  again  the  Father  is  the  eternal  Thinker, 
the  \\ox6.  is  the  eternal  Thought  eternally  uttered.  The 
Father  is  the  Source  whence  the  Holy  Ghost  proceeds 
the  Holy  Ghost  is  the  Proceeder.  We  are  here  using 
terms  not  of  theology,  nor  even  of  the  Church's  proposf- 
tion,  but  of  actual  revelation.  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
hmiself  used  these  words  as  sufficiently,  though  im- 
perfectly, expressing  the  truth  of  the  Divine  Nature.  He 
taught  us  to  believe  on  the  Name  of  "the  only  begotten 
Son  of  God."  He  announced  the  coming  of  the  Com- 
forter, "the  Spirit  of  truth,  which  proceedeth  from  the 
Father."  ^ 

Theologians  have  sought  a  reason  for  the  use  of  these 
terms.  They  have  shown  that  procession  is  of  two 
kinds ;  It  is  an  action  relative  to  an  object  without  the 
agent,  or  an  action  which  terminates  within  the  a^ent 
The  commg  of  the  Son  of  God  into  the  world  by  way  of 
Incarnation,  the  sending  of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  the 
Church,  are  actions  of  the  former  kind,  relative  to 
creation.  The  eternal  generation  of  the  Son  and  the 
eterna  procession  of  the  Holy  Ghost  are  actions  of  the 
latter  kind,  terminating  within  the  Divine  Nature  An 
example  of  such  action  is  found  in  the  formation  of  an 
Idea  withm  the  mind  of  a  thinking  man;  something  pro- 
ceeds from  the  mind,  yet  remains  within  the  mind 
1  here  is  here  some  analogy  to  what  takes  place  in  the 
Diyme  Nature.  It  is  argued  that  of  a  purely  spiritual 
Being  there  are  only  two  actions  terminating  thus  within 

'  John  iii.  i8  ;  xv.  26. 


G 


82  The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

the  agent.  They  are  Thought  and  Will.  There  are 
therefore  in  the  Divine  Nature  two  corresponding  Pro- 
cessions. There  is  the  Procession  of  the  Word.  This 
Procession  is  called  Generation  or  Begetting,  by  analogy 
with  that  kind  of  procession  found  in  nature,  whereby  a 
living  being  produces  a  being  like  itself.  The  Son  is 
God  of  God.-*  There  remains  a  Procession  by  the  action 
of  Will.  We  know  this  within  ourselves  as  love.  Love 
is  a  going  forth  of  oneself  to  the  object  of  love.  If  this 
object  be  within  oneself,  as  in  some  sense  it  always  is, 
being  a  conception  of  beauty  or  goodness  or  perfection 
of  some  kind  which  awakens  desire,  then  the  procession 
terminates  within  oneself.  Now  the  eternal  activity  of 
the  Will  of  God  is  the  mutual  love  of  the  Father  and  the 
Son,  -by  reason  of  which  it  may  be  said  that  God  is  Love. 
There  is  therefore  in  the  Divine  Nature  a  Procession  of 
Love.  It  is  not  called  Generation,  for  the  analogy  which 
furnishes  that  name  here  gives  place  to  another.  It  is 
called  nothing  else  but  Procession ;  and  that  which 
proceeds  is  called  nothing  else  but  Spirit,  which  means, 
as  we  have  seen,  the  going  forth  of  the  Divine  Activity. 

All  this  is  in  the  region  of  speculation ;  it  belongs  to 
the  analytical  science  of  religion,  not  to  the  practical 
knowledge  of  Christian  truth ;  but  I  have  set  it  down 
briefly,  because  it  may  help  to  meet  some  obstinate 
questionings  which  cannot  be  silenced.  When  all  is 
said  the  mystery  remains  inscrutable ;  and  this  we  may 
expect,  since  we  are  speaking  of  things  beyond  our 
experience,  made  known  to  us  in  Revelation  by  words 

'  The  expression  in  John  xvi.  28,  4i,r\\dov  irapa  rod  Uarphs,  may 
possibly  refer  only  to  the  mission  of  the  Incarnate  Word  ;  but 
reading  it  with  the  following  words,  koI  i\7]\vda  els  rhv  Koff/xov,  we 
seem  to  have  a  reference  both  to  the  eternal  procession  or  Genera- 
tion, and  to  the  temporal  procession  or  Incarnation. 


The  Holy  Trinity  83 

which  are  derived  from  our  experience,  and  can  therefore 
express  the  truth  only  by  imperfect  analogy. 

A  question  that  cannot  be  avoided  is  that  which  has 
for  centuries  divided  Eastern  and  Western  theologians. 
Westerns  say  that  the  Holy  Ghost  proceeds  from  the 
Father  and  the  Son.  The  expression  has  found  its  way 
into  the  Creed.  Easterns  say  that  the  Holy  Ghost  pro- 
ceeds from  the  Father  alone.  They  are  jealous  for  the 
truth  that  the  Father  alone  is  the  Source  of  Godhead, 
which  the  Western  formula  may  seem  to  impugn.  But 
on  the  other  hand  the  Fathers  of  the  Eastern  Church, 
who  wrote  before  the  controversy  arose,  use  without 
hesitation  language  which  would  now  be  regarded  as 
peculiarly  Western  ;  ^  and  when  Greeks  and  Latins  have 
met  in  amicable  discussion,  as  at  the  Council  of  Florence 
in  the  fifteenth  century  and  at  the  Conferences  held  at 
Bonn  in  1874  and  1875,  they  have  agreed  that  in 
different  forms  of  speech  they  express  the  same  truth. 

It  is  clear  that  the  temporal  mission  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  is  from  the  Father  and  the  Son.  The  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  spoke  of  the  Comforter,  "  Whom  I  will 
send  unto  you  from  the  Father,  even  the  Spirit  of  truth, 
which  proceedeth  from  the  Father."  -  But  more  than 
this  is  meant  by  the  double  Procession.  It  concerns 
the  eternal  relations  in  the  Divine  Nature.  In  this 
sense  it  has  been  explained  by  showing  that  the  Father 
and  the  Son  are  in  all  respects  One,  save  only  as  regards 
their  mutual  relation  of  Fatherhood  and  Sonship,  The 
Father  is  in  the  Son,  and  the  Son  is  in  the  Father,  and 
every  operation  of  the  Father  is  the  operation  also  of 
the  Son,  save  that  operation  whereby  the  Son  is  begotten. 

^  There  is  a  useful  note  on  the  language  of  the  Greek  Fathers  in 
iVtr.  Darwell  Stone's  Outlines  of  Christian  Dogma,  p.  276. 
-  John  XV.  26. 


84  The  Elemoits  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Therefore  the  Father  and  the  Son  are  the  one  Source 
whence  the  Holy  Ghost  proceeds.  But  since  the  Son 
is  himself  of  the  Father,  it  remains  that  the  Father  is 
the  one  ultimate  Source  of  Godhead.  There  is  however 
a  difficulty  here,  for  it  might  with  equal  reason  be  said 
that  since  the  Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost  are  in  like 
manner  One,  save  only  in  their  mutual  relations,  there- 
fore they  are  the  one  Source  whence  the  generation  of 
the  Son  proceeds  ;  and  the  Son  is  in  that  case  begotten  of 
the  Father  and  the  Holy  Ghost.  A  safer  explanation 
may  therefore  be  sought  in  the  conception  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  as  the  personal  existence  of  the  love  eternally 
going  forth  from  the  Father  to  the  Son,  and  in  return 
from  the  Son  to  the  Father.  It  still  remains  that  the 
Father  is  the  one  ultimate  Source ;  and  the  explanation 
connects  the  Western  formula  that  the  Holy  Ghost  pro- 
ceeds from  the  Father  and  the  Son  with  the  expression 
preferred  by  Eastern  theologians  that  he  proceeds  from 
the  Father  through  the  Son. 

The  two  errors  which  on  either  side  threaten  the 
doctrine  of  the  Holy  Trinity  are  Tritheism  and  Uni- 
tarianism.  Tritheism  is  belief  in  three  several  Principles, 
or  the  division  of  the  Divine  Substance  into  three 
several  Beings,  It  is  a  mistake  into  which  men  may 
imperceptibly  slip  through  careless  thinking  about  the 
mystery  of  the  Faith,  but  which  is  not  likely  to  be  held 
with  conscious  intent.  Its  most  common  form  is, 
perhaps,  the  several  attribution  of  justice  to  the  Eternal 
Father,  and  mercy  to  the  Son.  Unitarianism,  on  the 
other  hand,  is  an  error  consciously  adopted  and  per- 
tinaciously defended.  It  is  the  denial  of  the  existence 
of  personal  relations  in  the  Divine  Substance.  From  the 
third  to  the  fifth  centuries  it  troubled  the  Church  in  two 
forms.     Sabellianism  was  the   opinion  that   one   Divine 


The  Holy   Trinity  85 

Being  has  manifested  himself  in  three  modes,  according 
to  which  he  is  known  on  divers  occasions  as  the  Father, 
as  the  Son,  or  as  the  Holy  Ghost.  Arianism  was  the 
opinion  that  the  Son  and  the  Holy  Ghost  are  created 
beings,  far  indeed  above  all  other  creatures  and  im- 
measurably anterior  in  time,  but  not  eternal,  not  con- 
substantial  or  one  in  essence  with  the  Eternal  Father, 
not  therefore  truly  God.  The  great  historical  develop- 
ment of  Unitarianism,  however,  is  to  be  found  in 
the  system  of  Islam.  Mohammed,  deriving  his  belief 
partly  from  Christian  sectaries  and  partly  from  the  later 
Jews  who  were  in  revolt  against  the  doctrine  of  the 
Incarnation,  took  for  his  watchword  the  assertion  that 
God  is  neither  Begetter  nor  Begotten.  Within  the  pale 
of  Christianity  Unitarianism  reappeared  among  the  dis- 
orders of  the  sixteenth  century,  and  was  firmly  established 
in  Poland  by  the  work  of  Faustus  Socinus.  Socinianism 
is  properly  the  assertion  that  Jesus  Christ  began  to  be 
with  his  conception  by  the  Holy  Ghost ;  that  he  is  there- 
fore in  no  sense  eternal  or  very  God,  but  is  rightly 
called  the  Son  of  God,  and  has  been  raised  to  a  share 
in  the  Divine  sovereignty,  and  made  in  a  sense  equal 
to  the  Father.  Later  Unitarianism  has  shaken  off  these 
pagan  ideas,  and  stands  upon  belief  in  the  single  per- 
sonality of  the  incommunicable  essence  of  God,  regarding 
our  Lord  only  as  a  man  exceptionally  endowed  with 
Divine  graces. 

Sect.  \\\.—The  A tir Unites  of  God 

Several  qualities  are  in  Revelation  attributed  to  God. 
He  is  good  and  holy,  just  and  merciful ;  he  is  almighty ; 
he  has  perfect  knowledge  of  all  secret  things.  Here  as 
elsewhere    our   language    is  inadequate    to   express  the 


S6         The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

whole  truth.  These  attributes  are  in  reality  indistinguish- 
able from  the  Divine  Nature.  As  humanity  cannot 
exist  apart  from  man,  and  is  separable  only  in  thought 
from  individual  men,  so  divinity  and  all  that  is  meant  by 
divinity  can  be  distinguished  from  the  Being  of  God 
only  by  a  mental  abstraction.  Theologians  say  that  the 
attributes  of  God  are  God.  The  word  Divinity  expresses 
them  all ;  but  this  one  quality  is  presented  to  us  in 
several  aspects,  since  it  is  obviously  impossible  for  us  to 
take  in  the  whole  meaning  as  a  single  idea.  We  there- 
fore speak,  and  necessarily  speak,  of  the  several  attributes 
of  God. 

Most  of  these  are  attributes  of  the  Divine  Being  or  of 
the  undivided  Godhead ;  others  are  attributes  of  the 
Divine  Persons  as  distinct.  These  latter  are  called 
relative  attributes,  being  founded  exclusively  on  those 
mutual  relations  by  which  alone  the  Persons  are  dis- 
tinguished. They  may  be  rapidly  summarized.  The 
relative  attributes  of  the  Father  are  Unoriginate  Being ' 
in  Himself,  Fatherhood  in  relation  to  the  Son,  Pro- 
mission  -  in  relation  to  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  relative 
attributes  of  the  Son  are  Sonship  in  relation  to  the 
Father,  Promission  in  relation  to  the  Holy  Ghost.  The 
relative  attribute  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  that  Procession 
for  which  we  have  no  other  name. 

In  comparison  with  the  foregoing,  the  attributes  of  the 
Divine  Being  common  to  the  three  Persons  are  called 
absolute.  They  include  all  possible  perfections  of 
Spiritual  Being.  It  is  therefore  impossible  to  treat  them 
exhaustively,  for  we  have  no   complete   knowledge   of 

'  In  Greek,  ayewrja-ia.  Hooker,  £cct.  Pot.,  ,v.  51.  i  :  "The 
substance  of  God  with  this  property  io  be  of  none  doth  make  tlie 
Person  of  the  Father." 

-  npofioXri.     Latin  theologians  use  the  term  Spiratio. 


The  Attrihites  of  God  87 

God ;  nor  is  it  possible  even  to  enumerate  those  which 
are  expressly  revealed,  for  we  have  no  complete  know- 
ledge of  the  content  of  Revelation.  It  opens  out  before 
us  with  a  growth  of  knowledge,  to  which  we  can  see  no 
end,  save  in  the  Vision  of  God  which  is  the  promised 
beatitude  of  saints.  Nevertheless  it  is  not  without  profit 
to  enumerate  some  of  the  Divine  attributes,  which  stand 
out  most  prominently  in  Holy  Scripture,  not  gathering 
them  from  isolated  texts,  but  giving  in  sum  the  effect  of 
what  is  revealed. 

We  may  conveniently  distinguish  between  the  attributes 
of  Pure  Being,  and  attributes  regarding  the  two  great 
functions  of  Spirit,  the  intellectual  and  the  moral,  or 
Knowledge  and  Will.  But  further  we  may  consider  God 
either  as  he  is  in  himself,  or  as  the  cause  of  all  things 
that  are  made  ;  and  in  the  latter  case  his  attributes,  without 
ceasing  to  be  absolute  attributes  of  the  Divine  Nature, 
will  have  a  new  meaning  for  us  and  may  require  a  new 
name,  regarded  as  relative  to  his  creatures.  AVe  can 
therefore  gather  the  attributes  of  God  under  three  heads. 

In  the  first  place  we  may  regard  the  attributes  of  Pure 
Being.  Foremost  among  these  are  Unity  and  Eternity, 
which  enter,  as  we  have  seen,  into  the  primary  idea  of 
God.  Akin  to  these,  but  less  obvious,  is  the  attribute  of 
Infinity.  The  word  is  negative ;  it  signifies  the  absence 
of  all  those  limitations  which  are  imposed  on  created 
things.  These  are  distinct,  themselves  and  not  other 
things,  only  by  virtue  of  those  limitations.  Therefore 
infinity  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  world ;  it  is  equivalent  to 
nothingness ;  it  is  a  mere  abstraction,  the  removal  of  all 
that  constitutes  sensible  reality.  But  God  is  All,  without 
ceasing  to  be  Himself.  We  use  a  negative  term  to  express 
this,  denying  limitation  ;  but  the  meaning  is  positive.  The 
Infinity  of  God  is  the  Fulness  of  him  that  filleth  all  in  all. 


88  TJic  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Upon  the  Eternity  of  God  follows  the  attribute  of 
Immutability.  "I  am  the  Lord,  I  change  not."  For 
change  involves  both  end  and  beginning  ;  the  end  of  that 
which  is  passing  away,  and  the  beginning  of  that  into 
which  it  passes.  Upon  the  Infinity  of  God  follows  the 
attribute  of  Singleness  or  Simplicity.  That  which  is 
infinite  cannot  be  conceived  as  divided  into  parts,  or 
made  up  of  components,  for  these  ideas  both  import 
limitation.  With  one  exception  everything  that  we  know 
by  experience  is  composed,  and  may  be  resolved  into 
its  elements.  The  exception  is  our  own  spiritual  nature, 
which  our  consciousness  of  complete  personal  identity 
forbids  us  to  regard  as  made  up  of  the  several  modes 
of  its  activity.  Here  only  in  the  range  of  our  experience 
we  find  an  image  of  the  Singleness  or  Simplicity  of 
God.  The  importance  of  this  attribute  lies  in  the 
necessity  of  guarding  against  that  division  of  the  idea 
of  God  which  leads  to  polytheism.  God  is  not  a  com- 
pound of  attributes,  or  a  many-sided  being,  to  be 
approached,  now  on  this  side,  now  on  that,  according  to 
the  needs  of  the  moment.  It  will  guard  also  against 
those  false  ideas  of  the  Divine  action  which  set  the 
Justice  and  Mercy  of  God  in  opposition,  and  suppose  the 
need  of  some  arrangement  for  their  reconciliation.  The 
Immutability  and  Simplicity  of  the  Divine  Nature  con- 
stitute in  our  thought  the  idea  of  Perfection.  To  the 
attributes  thus  distinguished  we  must  add  the  attribute 
of  Life.  We  believe  in  the  Living  God.  The  idea  of 
life,  which  we  form  from  our  knowledge  of  ourselves,  is 
used  in  Revelation  as  an  image  of  an  essential  quality  of 
the  Spiritual  Being  of  God. 

In  immediate  sequence  upon  this  we  may  regard  the 
attributes  which  belong  to  Spirit  as  working  in  Know- 
ledge and  Will.     In  human  sjiirit  we  have  an  image  of 


The  Attributes  of  God  89 

the  Divine  Spirit.  The  attributes  of  human  spirit  are 
images  of  the  Divine  attributes,  but  we  cannot  safely 
argue  from  the  image  to  the  archetype  without  the  help 
of  Revelation,  by  which  we  are  directed  to  that  in  human 
spirit  which  does  in  some  measure  reflect  the  Divine. 
We  begin  with  the  attribute  of  Knowledge.  Knowledge 
is  in  the  first  place  self-consciousness  ;  and  since  God  is 
All,  or  Infinite,  the  knowledge  of  God  is  infinite.  It 
follows,  moreover,  from  his  Immutability  and  Simplicity 
that  his  knowledge  is  not  extended  in  parts,  so  that  he 
should  know  all  things  successively ;  but  all  is  eternally 
present  to  him;  a  truth  which  is  feebly  expressed  by 
the  saying  that  with  him  a  thousand  years  are  as 
yesterday. 

The  attribute  of  ^Vill  is  but  faintly  imaged  in  us.  The 
human  will  is  determined  by  various  influences,  among 
which  is  the  choice  of  the  man  himself.  This  element 
of  choice  is  in  ordinary  circumstances  so  far  dominant, 
that  a  man's  action  is  ultimately  self-determined,  and  he 
is  therefore  a  free  and  responsible  agent ;  but  other 
influences  are  continually  pressing  upon  him,  sometimes 
with  overwhelming  force.  By  abstracting  these  influences 
we  can  arrive  at  the  idea  of  an  absolutely  self-determined 
will ;  and  such  is  the  Will  of  God.  This  does  not  mean 
that  he  is  without  law.  His  own  Immutability  is  in  the 
place  of  law  to  him ;  and  whereas  in  man  self-will  is  the 
defiance  of  law,  and  consequent  disorderliness,  the  self- 
determined  Will  of  God  is  the  perfection  of  order. 

Upon  the  attribute  of  Will  follows  that  of  Power.  The 
human  will,  even  when  determined,  is  often  inoperative, 
because  it  has  to  work  upon  resistant  material.  The 
Will  of  God  is  absolutely  operative.  Himself  being  All, 
there  is  nothing  without  him  to  resist ;  and  being  perfect 
in  Simplicity,  there  can  be  no  conflict  within. 


90         TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

We  turn  to  the  moral  attributes  of  the  human  spirit, 
and  we  find  two  which  are  pre-eminently  reflections 
of  the  Divine  attributes  :  Righteousness  and  Goodness. 
We  form  the  highest  possible  conception  of  righteousness, 
as  shown  in  the  dealings  of  the  just  man,  or  in  the 
administrative  justice  of  an  incorruptible  judge,  and  we 
are  taught  to  see  in  this  a  faint  image  of  the  Righteous- 
ness of  God.  In  the  kindness  of  human  fatherhood  we 
are  taught  to  see  an  image  of  his  Goodness.  But  further, 
human  kindness  raised  to  its  full  height  is  known  as  love, 
and  the  crowning  truth  of  Revelation  is  that  God  is  Love. 
And  whereas  in  human  love  there  are  two  moments, 
desire  and  satisfaction,  which  are  at  best  successive  and 
are  often  severed,  in  the  Love  of  God,  by  reason  of  his 
Immutability  and  Simplicity,  there  can  be  no  such 
severance.  The  essential  Love  which  is  in  the  Holy 
Trinity  has  therefore  the  attribute  of  satisfied  desire, 
which  is  Beatitude.     God  is  blessed  for  evermore. 

These  are  revealed  attributes  of  God,  as  he  is  in  his 
eternal  Being.  We  shall  have  to  consider  in  the  third 
place  these  attributes  regarded  as  relative  to  the  creature. 
But  this  we  cannot  do  until  we  have  taken  account  of  the 
act  of  creation,  what  it  is,  and  what  are  its  results.  It 
remains  in  this  place  only  to  note  the  possibilities  of 
error  concerning  the  Divine  attributes. 

As  we  have  said,  the  attributes  of  God  are  not 
separable  from  the  Divine  Nature.  We  are  taught  that 
God  is  righteous  and  loving,  ^^^e  are  taught  also  that  he 
is  Righteousness,  that  he  is  Love.  Each  attribute  is  indeed 
a  mode  of  presenting  to  our  apprehension  the  One 
Infinite  Being.  It  follows  that  God  may  be  regarded, 
and  therefore  worshipped,  as  Love,  as  Righteousness,  as 
Power,  as  Life.  But  in  this  practice  there  lurks  a  danger. 
Failing  to  grasp  the  simplicity  of  the  Divine  Nature,  men 


The  Attributes  of  God  91 

may  worship  the  several  attributes  as  several  existences. 
Such  is  the  nature  of  the  higher  and  more  philosophic 
polytheism.  The  Divine  Being  is  approached  in  different 
fashions  at  different  times.  An  appeal  to  his  Power  is 
regarded  as  a  different  thing  from  an  appeal  to  his  Good- 
ness. There  follows  the  idea  of  contrariety  between  the 
attributes  ;  and  for  the  Divine  Unity  the  mind  substitutes 
an  assembly  of  independent  or  even  of  mutually  resistant 
powers. 

The  error  which  without  breaking  up  the  Divine 
Unity  separates  the  attributes  as  coexisting  in  a  single 
Being,  is  Anthropomorphism.  Human  attributes  image, 
with  more  or  less  of  distortion,  the  Divine  attributes, 
and  the  names  of  the  human  are  used  for  the  Divine ; 
but  if  we  attempt  to  argue  directly  from  the  image 
we  shall  not  arrive  at  the  truth  of  God,  but  only  at 
a  gigantic  copy  of  man — the  shadow  of  a  shadow.  In 
ourselves,  because  of  the  limitations  of  our  activity, 
attributes  are  really  separate  and  sometimes  contrarient. 
Our  will  is  not  the  same  as  our  power,  nor  even  com- 
mensurate with  it.  Justice  does  not  coincide  with  good- 
ness, but  may  require  a  man  to  act  in  opposition  to  the 
impulse  of  natural  love.  Anthropomorphism  attributes 
to  God  a  like  division  and  contrariety.  It  practically 
denies  the  attributes  of  Pure  Being,  substituting  for 
eternity  the  idea  of  boundless  duration,  for  infinity 
the  idea  of  ubiquity.  The  Divine  attributes  being 
thrown  into  confusion,  schemes  are  then  devised  for 
reconciling  the  Justice  and  Goodness  of  God,  his  Will 
and  his  Power,  not  unlike  those  by  which  men  struggle 
to  maintain  their  own  consistency.  It  is  a  grosser,  but 
not  a  more  mischievous  Anthropomorphism,  which  fastens 
upon  the  words  of  Scripture  where  for  the  sake  of  vivid 
presentment  God  is  spoken    of  in  material    terms,  and 


92         The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

attributes  to  him  parts  and  passions,  and  the  Umitations 
proper  to  corporeal  existence. 


Sect.  \N .—The  Creation  of  the  World 

God  is  the  First  Cause  of  all  things  that  are.  This,  we 
have  seen,  is  a  truth  of  Natural  Religion.  In  Revelation 
the  truth  is  assumed,  but  much  is  added  which  the 
natural  understanding  could  only  feel  after,  and  apprehend 
imperfectly,  if  at  all.  Much  yet  remains  unrevealed ;  for 
God  makes  known  to  us  only  that  which  it  concerns  our 
spiritual  welfare  to  know.  Much  is  gradually  unfolded 
before  the  search  of  human  science.  Christian  doctrine 
is  properly  concerned  only  with  what  is  revealed ;  but 
the  understanding  of  Christian  doctrine  may  be  retarded 
by  mistaken  experience,  or  aided  by  better  investigation. 

In  considering  the  doctrine  of  Creation  we  are  met  by 
a  difficulty  at  the  outset.  Things  which  are  caused  have 
a  beginning.  Revelation  repeats  the  truth  of  nature 
that  "  In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heaven  and  the 
earth."  But  beginning  means  change  ;  it  implies  also 
a  point  of  time  standing  in  relation  to  successive 
moments.  How  then  can  we  speak  of  a  beginning  in 
the  work  of  God  the  Eternal  ?  Even  as  the  act  of  God 
which  we  call  Procession  or  Generation  is  eternal,  must 
not  the  work  of  God  that  we  call  Creation  be  eternal  ? 
If  God  be  the  Creator,  must  we  not  say  that  he  eternally 
creates?  The  creature  will  then  be  coeternal  with 
God. 

The  answer  is  that  this  beginning  is  relative  only  to 
the  succession  that  follows.  It  does  not  imply  a  point 
in  eternity,  dividing  eternity  into  a  before  and  after. 
Such  a  conception  contradicts  the  idea  of  eternity,  in 
which  is  no  past  and  future.     The  beginning  of  creation 


The  Creation  of  the   World  93 

is  therefore  not  a  beginning  of  God's  action,  but  the 
beginning  of  that  sequence  of  time  which  is  the  effect  of 
God's  action.  Human  reason  is  a  part  of  creation,  and 
time  is  a  form  of  created  thought ;  we  know  things  only 
as  they  are  presented  to  us  in  time,  that  is  to  say,  in 
sequence ;  and  a  sequence  or  series  cannot  be  conceived 
without  beginning.  A  sentence  therefore  Hke  that  in 
which  the  Divine  Wisdom  says — 

"  The  Lord  possessed  me  in  the  beginning  of  his  way, 
Before  his  works  of  old," 

is  an  instance  of  the  accommodation  of  eternal  reahties 
to  the  hmits  of  human  thought.  We  may  say  that 
creation,  in  so  far  as  it  is  the  action  of  God,  is  eternal, 
since  God  himself  is  pure  eternal  activity ;  buj^  crea- 
tion, in  so  far  as  it  is  the  effect  of  God's  action  known 
to  us  by  natural  sense,  has  a  beginning  and  sequence  of 
time.^ 

There  is  another  difficulty  of  the  same  kind.  If  God 
be  infinite,  he  is  All.  How  then  can  there  be  anything 
which  is  not  Himself?  Or,  conversely,  if  he  create  a 
world  which  is  other  than  Himself,  as  the  effect  is  other 
than  the  cause,  how  is  he  infinite  ?  He  is  limited  by  the 
coexistence  with  him  of  that  which  is  not  Himself. 

This  difficulty  is  partly  to  be  solved  in  the  same  way 

'  Prov.  viii.  22.  St.  Thomas  Aq.  %ii-^%{De  Potcntia,\\\.  17,  ad  4), 
"  Non  ponimus  Deum  causam  miindi  ex  necessitate  naturae  suae, 
sed  ex  voluntate ;  unde  necessarium  est  effectum  divinum  sequi, 
non  quandocumque  natura  divina  fuit,  sed  quando  dispositum  est 
voluntate  divina  ut  esset,  et  secundum  modum  eundem  quo  voluit 
ut  esset."  The  word  qjiando  seems  however  to  import  inaccurate 
matter  of  thought ;  as  also  do  the  words  post  non  esse  in  the  corre- 
sponding passage  of  the  Siimma  T/ieoL,  i.  46.  i,  "  Ex  actione  Dei 
aeterna  non  sequitur  effectus  aeternus,  sed  qualem  Deus  voluit ;  ut 
scilicet  haberet  esse  post  non  esse;"  unless  indeed  post,  like 
sequitur,  signifies  only  a  logical,  not  a  temporal  sequence. 


94         The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

as  the  former.  So  far  as  the  supposed  limitation  depends 
on  the  existence  of  the  universe  in  space,  it  is  sufficient 
to  note  that  space,  the  perceptible  extension  of  things 
known,  is,  like  time,  a  form  of  created  thought.  But 
this  touches  only  the  fringe  of  the  difficulty.  Apart  from 
all  idea  of  extension,  it  remains  that  if  we  distinguish  the 
universe  logically  as  not  God,  we  seem  to  destroy  the 
infinity  of  God. 

Of  this  difficulty  there  is  no  solution  to  be  found  in 
nature,  and  in  revelation  the  two  opposed  terms  of  the 
problem  are  affirmed  without  reconciliation.  The  denial 
of  this  opposition  is  Pantheism.  Pantheism  regards  the 
world  as  a  manifestation  of  God.  According  to  this 
systen^  we  know  the  Divine  Nature  in  two  modes,  as  Spirit 
and  as  Matter.  These  two,  inseparably  one,  are  God, 
as  soul  and  body  are  Man.  The  system  raises  new 
difficulties,  moral  and  logical ;  but  they  are  little,  if 
at  all,  greater  than  those  which  attend  a  belief  in  the 
distinction  of  Creator  and  Creature.  It  is  not  because 
of  its  inherent  difficulties  that  Pantheism  is  condemned, 
but  because  it  is  the  denial  of  truths  upheld  by  external 
evidence.  The  distinction  of  Creator  and  Creature,  of 
First  Cause  and  effect,  is  found  in  nature,  and  is 
confirmed  in  Revelation;  and  here  moreover  is  taught 
the  still  deeper  mystery,  that  a  certain  antagonism  also 
is  possible,  the  rebellion  of  the  creature  against  the 
Creator.  But  the  distinction  is  not  such  that  the  creature 
excludes  the  Creator,  who  is  the  fulness  of  all  things, 
while  at  the  same  time  transcending  all.  This  is  the 
truth  of  God's  immanence  in  the  world,  expressed  by 
St.  John  :  "  He  was  in  the  world,  and  the  world  was 
made  by  him,  and  the  world  knew  him  not."  Of  this 
truth  Pantheism  is  a  travesty.  We  express  the  same 
truth  more  crudely  by  saying  that  God  is  omnipresent — 


The  Creation  of  the   World  95 

a  term  which  labours  under  the  disadvantage  of  suggest- 
ing diffusion  through  space,  but  which  is  sound  if  under- 
stood in  the  sense  that  wherever  I  put  myself  in  space 
I  am  equally  and  in  the  same  way  in  the  presence  of  God. 
But  God,  present  to  all  alike  that  are  in  space,  is  not 
himself  to  be  conceived  in  terms  of  space,  and  so  remains 
in  his  proper  Infinity. 

We  are  taught  that  God  created  all  things  by  his 
Word.  "  By  the  Word  of  the  Lord  were  the  heavens 
made."  "  God  said,  Let  there  be  light :  and  there  was 
light."  "  He  spake,  and  it  was  done."  This  was  inter- 
preted by  Philo  and  the  Alexandrine  school  generally 
of  that  Eternal  Word  whose  personal  subsistence  was 
in  a  measure  perceived  by  them ;  and  their  interpretation 
is  confirmed  by  its  adoption  in  the  Gospel  of  St.  John, 
who  says  of  the  personal  Word,  "  All  things  were  made 
by  him,  and  without  him  was  not  anything  made  that 
hath  been  made."  The  expression  has  passed  into  the 
Creed,  where,  having  confessed  God  the  Father  as 
Maker  of  heaven  and  earth,  we  say  that  all  things  were 
made  by  the  Son.  The  Father  gives  being  to  the  Son, 
"  through  whom  also  he  made  the  worlds."  The  Father 
is  the  one  Source  of  being  and  becoming;  the  Son  is 
one  with  the  Father,  as  in  all  else,  so  in  the  act  of 
creation.^ 

The  meaning  of  creation  by  the  Word  of  God  may  be 
illustrated  by  facts  of  our  own  consciousness.     We  are 

*  Ps.  xxxiii.  6,  9  ;  Gen.  i.  3  j  Heb.  i.  2.  The  Arians  argued, 
from  the  preposition  5ta  in  John  i.  3  and  Heb.  i.  2,  that  the  Son 
was  only  the  mstrumcnt,  opyavov,  of  creation,  and  so  himself  a 
creature,  though  of  higher  order.  The  error  lay  not  so  much  in  the 
use  of  the  word  as  in  the  supposition  that  the  upyavov  must  be  a 
creature,  different  in  essence  from  the  Creator.  The  preposition 
does  signify,  as  St.  Thomas  Aq.  says  (Sitmma  TheoL,  i.  45.  6),  that 
the  Son  is  "Causa  media,  sive  principium  de  principio." 


96         TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

conscious  of  the  power  of  forming  an  idea.  We  form 
this  of  material  presented  to  our  senses,  but  the  formative 
principle  is  the  intelligence.  An  idea  thus  formed  in 
thought  has  a  proper  existence  of  its  own ;  yet  it  has  no 
existence  apart  from  the  thinking  mind.  It  is  an  object 
of  thought,  and  yet  is  not  constituted  in  dual  existence 
apart  from  thought.  It  exists  in  the  mind,  but  is  not 
the  mind  or  part  of  the  mind ;  the  sum  total  of  all  ideas 
contained  in  the  mind  does  not  constitute  the  mind ; 
they  are  constituted  by  the  mind,  which  transcends  them 
all.  There  is  here  something  analogous  to  creation. 
The  analogy  is  very  imperfect.  If  we  could  form  ideas 
without  material  given  through  sense,  it  would  be  some- 
what closer.  Let  us  then  suppose  this  power  in  God. 
We  have  considered  the  intellectual  activity  of  God  as 
the  eternal  generation  of  the  Word,  the  idea  of  Self,  the 
express  image  of  the  Father,  who  is  coessential  with  the 
Father,  Suppose  now  the  formation  in  the  Divine 
Thought,  the  subsisting  Word,  of  an  idea  which  is  not 
Self,  the  idea  of  the  world.  That  idea  has  a  proper 
existence  of  its  own,  though  not  apart  from  God.  It  is 
an  object  of  God's  regard;  yet  is  not  constituted  in  dual 
existence  apart  from  God,  so  as  to  exclude  God.  It  has 
a  proper  existence,  which  is  the  natural  existence  of  all 
created  things.  We  distinguish  here  two  operations  of 
God  :  generation,  which  is  the  procession  of  the  Word  ; 
creation,  which  is  the  formation  of  the  idea  of  the  world. 
Philo  and  his  school  conceived  only  one  operation, 
identifying  the  Word  with  the  archetypal  idea  of  the 
world.  We  are  taught  to  distinguish  these,  and  so  to 
distinguish  the  two  operations.^ 

'  Philo,  Dc  Miindi  Opificio,  p.  5  C,  cd.  1691:  AtjAoj/ Se  8ti  koX 
7]  apx^Tviros  (Tcppayls,  '6v  (pa/xev  eluai  k6(X^ov  vorjrhv,  avrhs  fee  fit]  rh 
apxtTv-rrou  irapdSfiyfxa,  ISta  tuv  tSecov,  6  Qiov  \6yoi. 


TJie  Creation  of  the    World  97 

As  we  see  it,  the  work  of  creation  is  a  process,  with 
beginning  and  sequence,  for  we  can  think  only  in  the 
forms  of  time  and  space.  So  regarding  it,  we  are  com- 
pelled to  think  of  God  as  continually  working,  as  direct- 
ing the  progress  of  events  in  the  minutest  particular. 
This  direction  of  the  world  we  call  Providence.  It  is 
asserted  with  great  plainness  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
The  very  hairs  of  our  head,  he  taught,  are  numbered, 
and  not  a  sparrow  can  fall  to  the  ground  without  our 
heavenly  Father. 

Against  this  truth  of  God's  providence  is  set  the  idea 
of  creation  which  was  once  known  as  Deism.  According 
to  this  scheme,  God  created  the  universe  and  set  it  going 
with  a  system  of  natural  laws,  which  produce  a  sequence 
of  cause  and  eftect  independent  of  any  continuous  Divine 
action.  The  rise  of  Deism  in  the  seventeenth  century 
was  partly  due  to  a  revival  of  Epicurean  conceptions, 
but  in  part  it  followed  from  the  growing  sense  of 
invariable  sequence  in  phenomena  which  was  the 
foundation  of  modern  science.  There  seemed  to  be 
no  room  for  the  continued  intervention  of  Will ;  and  the 
Divine  action,  ruled  out  of  the  physical  government  of 
the  world,  was  with  logical  consistency  ruled  out  of  its 
moral  government  as  well.  The  whole  Christian  dis- 
pensation seemed  incredible. 

This  difficulty  is  caused  by  applying  to  the  Divine  action 
the  limitations  of  time,  of  antecedence  and  consequence. 
It  is  not  by  a  succession  of  separate  acts  of  will  that  God 
directs  the  world,  but  by  his  one  unchanging  act  which 
is  creation.  Religion  is  not  intended  to  supplement 
natural  science,  or  to  come  to  its  aid  when  at  a  loss, 
but  the  Christian  doctrine  of  God  does  incidentally 
supply  an  explanation  of  that  uniformity  of  sequence 
which  is  for  science  merely  an  inexplicable  fact.     The 

H 


98  TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

immutability  of  the  Creator  is  reflected  in  the  uniformity 
of  creation.  By  whatever  process  in  time  the  world  and 
all  that  is  in  the  world  has  come  to  be  what  we  now  see 
it  to  be,  all,  down  to  the  smallest  detail,  is  provided  for 
in  the  one  original  act  of  creation.  If  the  physical 
theory  be  true  that  primary  matter  existed  without  form, 
and  that  from  such  matter  all  has  been  evolved  by 
differentiation,  then,  it  has  been  said,  "  primary  matter 
was  already,  in  eternal  Thought,  all  that  it  has  become."  ^ 
The  work  of  creation  is  not  only  assumed  in  Holy 
Scripture  \  it  is  described.  The  description  is  contained 
in  the  first  two  chapters  of  Genesis,  and  is  referred  to  in 
many  other  places.  It  is  clear  even  to  a  superficial 
reader  that  two  separate  accounts  are  joined  together 
without  any  attempt  to  harmonize  them.  The  conjectures 
and  conclusions  of  experts  in  Biblical  criticism  upon  this 
and  other  similar  combinations  are  foreign  to  our  argu- 
ment. The  two  accounts  of  creation  may  be  remains  of 
a  primeval  tradition;  they  may  be  imaginative  recon- 
structions of  the  truth  which  nature  taught;  they  may 
be  the  record  of  visions  in  the  nature  of  prophecy. 
We  receive  them  as  incorporated  in  the  sacred  books ; 
and  we  are  concerned  with  the  truth  which  they  affirm, 
not  with  the  manner  of  the  affirmation.  It  is  not  sur- 
prising that,  until  good  reason  was  shown  for  the  contrary 

'  I  transcribe  this  sentence,  with  all  reserve,  from  my  notes  of 
a  lecture  of  the  late  Professor  T.  H.  Green.  Compare  the  language 
of  St.  Augustine,  De  Fide  et  Syntbolo,  2  :  "  Nullo  modo  credendum 
est  illam  ipsam  materiam,  de  qua  factus  est  mundus,  quamvis 
informem,  quamvis  invisam,  quocunque  modo  esset,  per  se  ipsam 
esse  potuisse,  tanquam  coaeternam  et  coaevam  Deo  :  sed  quem- 
libet  modum  suum  quern  habebat,  ut  quoquo  modo  esset,  et 
distinctanwi  rentm  formas  posset  accipere,  non  habebat  nisi  ab 
omnipotente  Deo,  cuius  beneficio  est  res  non  solum  quaecunque 
formata,  sed  etiam  quaecunque  formabilis." 


The  Creation  of  the    JVorM  99 

opinion,  men  accepted  the  account  of  the  six  days  in  a 
Hteral  sense.  Yet  we  must  not  forget  that  Philo  thought 
this  ridiculous,  and  some  of  the  Christian  Fathers  with 
more  reserve  suggested  other  interpretations.^ 

What  is  actually  revealed  in  Scripture  appears  to 
be  the  production  and  ordering  of  the  world  by  the 
Word  of  God,  and  perhaps  the  distinction  between 
things  immediately  produced,  and  things  produced 
mediately  out  of  prejacent  material.  Some  writers  have 
thus  distinguished  the  works  of  the  first  three  days  from 
those  of  the  last  three.  This  would  be  the  distinction 
between  the  creation  of  matter  and  the  evolution  of 
organisms.  But  such  a  distinction  belongs  rather  to 
physics  than  to  Christian  doctrine.  It  is  safer  to  say 
that  so  far  there  is  one  only  truth  revealed,  the  creation 
of  all  things  by  the  Word  of  God.  The  creation  of  man 
will  have  to  be  further  considered. 

Regarded  as  relative  to  creation,  the  attributes  of 
God  appear  to  us  in  a  new  light.  There  are  not  new 
attributes  consequent  upon  creation.  Such  novelty  is 
contrary  to  the  truth  of  God's  Being.  The  variation  is 
in  our  apprehension.  Thus  the  attribute  of  Infinity 
becomes  for  us,  in  relation  to  the  expanse  of  space,  the 
attribute  of  Omnipresence.  The  attribute  of  Knowledge 
becomes,  in  relation  to  the  multitude  of  created  objects, 
Omniscience ;  it  becomes  Wisdom,  when  regarded  as 
meetly  ordering  all  things.  The  attribute  of  Power 
becomes  Omnipotence  when  regarded  as  exercised  in 
relation  to  created  forces,  and  becomes  Providence  when 
related  to  the  continual  government  of  the  world.  As 
we  distinguish  between  the  absolute  attributes  because 
of  our  inability  to  comprehend  all  in  a  single  idea  of 

'  Philo,  p.  41  A  :  Evr]6es  wwu  tu  oleadat  6|  ri/x€pais  fj  Ka06\ov 
Xpoyt}'  K6<Xfjiov  yiyovivixi. 


100        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

God,  so  we  distinguish  between  the  attributes  relative  to 
creation,  because  of  the  necessity  under  which  we  labour 
of  conceiving  creation  in  the  forms  of  time  and  space. 


Sect.  Y.—T/ic  Spirit// a  I  Ctration 

Man  knows  himself  as  body  and  spirit.  In  the  study 
of  his  own  nature  he  finds  many  difficulties,  which  increase 
rather  than  diminish  with  the  increase  of  his  knowledge. 
The  problems  of  biology  and  psychology  are  the  result. 
With  these  Christian  doctrine  has  no  proper  concern ;  it 
is  concerned  with  the  facts  of  which  those  sciences 
attempt  the  interpretation.  Interpretations  which  amount 
to  a  denial  of  the  facts  are  hostile  to  the  faith.  The 
materialism  which  reduces  spirit  to  a  motion  of  the  body, 
and  the  spiritualism  which  regards  the  body  as  an  alien 
envelope  or  prison  of  the  soul,  are  equally  opposed  to 
Christian  truth.  But  no  interpretation  which  takes  account 
of  the  facts  will  be  directly  hostile,  though  an  erroneous 
interpretation  may  be  a  hindrance  to  belief. 

In  Holy  Scripture  there  are  two  accounts  of  the  creation 
of  man,  each  of  which  puts  forward  a  separate  truth. 
In  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  we  read  that  God  created 
man  in  his  own  image.  In  the  second  chapter  it  is  said 
that  God  formed  man  of  the  dust  of  the  ground,  and 
breathed  into  his  nostrils  the  breath  of  life,  and  man 
became  a  living  soul.  The  latter  account  contains 
nothing  on  the  face  of  it  but  the  statement  that  man  is 
composed  of  body  and  spirit ;  that  his  body  is  formed 
of  the  same  matter  as  the  earth,  and  that  his  soul  or 
spirit  is  a  separate  creation.  The  former  account  adds 
the  statement  that  man  has  a  likeness  to  God  ;  and  this 
likeness  cannot  be  sought  elsewhere  than  in  the  spirit. 

We  know  the  spirit  of  man  as  animating  the  body,  and 


The  Spiritual  Creation  loi 

we  know  it  naturally  in  no  other  way.  So  regarded,  we 
call  it  properly  the  soul.  We  know  the  body  as  animated 
by  the  soul.  We  know  it  also  as  the  instrument  of  the 
soul,  a  knowledge  which  modern  science  seems  likely  to 
render  very  precise.  We  can  trace  no  action  of  the  soul 
without  the  body  ;  the  merest  exercise  of  thought  calls 
into  play  certain  bodily  functions  ;  a  lesion  of  a  small 
part  of  the  brain  paralyses  functions  the  most  purely 
spiritual.  It  is  natural  to  infer  that  the  body  is  the 
necessary  instrument  without  which  the  soul  can  have 
no  activity.  But  we  further  know  the  body  as  inanimate 
in  death,  and  afterwards  dissolved  into  its  elements.  It 
is  natural  to  infer  that  when  the  body  thus  ceases  to 
exist  as  body,  the  soul  also  either  ceases  to  exist,  or 
passes  into  a  condition  of  wholly  inactive  existence.  But 
the  human  mind  is  possessed  by  an  obstinate  conviction 
that  when  the  body  is  dissolved  the  soul  continues  to 
exist  in  some  sort  of  activity.  The  conviction  was 
obscurely  supported  by  the  revelation  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. It  receives  a  glorious  confirmation  from  the 
teaching  of  Jesus  Christ.  It  is  therefore  an  essential  point 
of  Christian  doctrine  that  the  soul  of  man  does  not  perish 
with  the  body,  but  is  capable  of  a  separate  existence  in 
some  sort  of  activity.  The  soul  is  not  merely  a  force 
animating  the  body,  but  is  a  proper  spirit. 

^Vhat  sort  of  existence  the  disembodied  spirit  has  we 
do  not  know.  Very  little  is  revealed,  and  except  by 
revelation  we  know  nothing  positive.  This  kind  of 
existence  is  subject  however  to  one  obvious  limitation. 
The  disembodied  spirit  is  not  the  whole  man ;  it  can 
have  no  activity  which  requires  for  its  integrity  the  use 
of  the  body  as  instrument,  and  whatever  action  there 
be  is  not  the  action  of  the  man  taken  as  a  whole. 
Theologians     have    discussed     this     point    under    the 


I02        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

question  whether  the  disembodied  spirit  be  a  person. 
They  deny  this,  taking  personality  not  as  determined 
according  to  modern  use  by  self-consciousness  alone, 
but  as  signifying  the  whole  human  being,  with  all 
his  natural  capacities  and  responsibilities.  What  is 
clearly  taught  by  revelation  is  that  in  death  the  human 
spirit  retains  consciousness,  and  in  particular  the  capacity 
of  sorrow  and  bliss.  St.  Paul  had  no  doubt  that  for 
him  to  depart  and  to  be  with  the  Lord  Jesus  was  far 
better  than  to  remain  in  the  body.  But  the  state  thus 
described  is  not  perfect  or  permanent.  The  doctrine  of 
the  Resurrection  will  be  considered  elsewhere ;  here  we 
do  but  note  that  our  Christian  hope  is  the  reconstruction 
of  the  whole  man,  body  and  soul ;  the  promises  of  the 
New  Testament  more  often  concern  the  state  of  the 
resurrection  than  the  state  of  the  disembodied  spirit. 

By  revelation,  then,  we  know  the  soul  of  man  to  be  a 
distinct  and  separable  spirit.  This  human  spirit,  an 
image  of  the  Divine  Spirit,  has  the  functions  of  know- 
ledge and  will.  These  are  normally  exercised  through 
the  body  as  instrument,  but  they  continue  apart  from  the 
body.  St.  Paul  insists  that  love  will  never  fail  in  life  or 
in  death ;  and  love  is  an  energy  of  the  will,  determined 
towards  an  object  that  is  known. ^ 

The  existence  of  the  human  spirit  being  established, 
we  naturally  ask  if  there  be  any  other  created  spirit.  We 
know  other  kinds  of  life  than  human  life,  other  bodies 
animated  by  other  souls.    We  trace  orders  of  incorporate 

'  I  Cor.  xiii.  8,  scqq.  Observe  that  ^vucns,  or  knowledge  such  as 
we  now  have,  will  be  done  away,  but  only  to  pass  into  iirlyyuaiT, 
or  more  perfect  knowledge,  while  ayd-n-rj  will  continue  always  as 
now.  It  does  not  concern  the  present  argument  to  decide  whether 
the  change  from  yifHais  to  (Triyvooa-n  be  referred  to  death  or  to  the 
resurrection. 


The  Spiritual  Creation  103 

life  through  stages  of  diminishing  complexity,  until  we 
come  to  organisms  of  which  it  is  hard  to  say  whether  we 
should  class  them  as  living  beings  or  no.  In  the  higher 
orders  w^e  find  a  likeness  to  man  ;  they  seem  to  have 
knowledge  of  a  kind  and  the  rudiments  of  will.  The 
general  opinion  of  civilized  man  is  that  certain  functions, 
distinguished  as  purely  animal,  are  here  in  play,  which 
differ  essentially  from  the  rational  and  spiritual  faculties 
of  man,  though  resembling  them  in  the  use  made  of  the 
bodily  organs.  The  definition  of  man  as  a  rational  animal 
proceeds  on  this  supposition.  But  whatever  be  the  con- 
clusions of  psychology,  nothing  is  taught  by  revelation 
about  the  nature  of  animal  life. 

There  is  a  persistent  human  tradition  that  spirits  exist 
which  are  unconnected  with  a  material  body.  This 
tradition  is  confirmed  in  the  fullest  measure  by  revelation. 
In  the  language  of  the  New  Testament,  some  of  these 
spirits  are  called  demons^  a  familiar  Greek  name  for  such 
beings ;  others  are  called  angels,  as  being  messengers  and 
servants  of  God.  The  doctrine  of  ang.els  and  demons 
has  been  made  the  occasion  of  much  theological  in- 
genuity. For  our  present  purpose  it  is  sufficient  to  note 
that  they  are  equally  wdth  the  human  spirit  creatures  of 
God,  endowed  wdth  the  same  spiritual  faculties  of  know- 
ledge and  will,  and  equally  ably  to  act  upon  material 
things.  The  difficulty  of  understanding  how  this  last 
power  can  be  exercised  is  great,  but  not  greater  than  the 

'  How  entirely  colourless  the  word  was  in  itself  is  shown  by  the 
fact  that  St.  Ignatius,  Ad Smyrn.,\\\.,  reports  our  Lord  as  saying 
after  his  resurrection  ovk  eljA  ^aiixoviov  aadofxarov,  where  St.  Luke 
(xxiv.  39)  uses  the  word-Trz/eC/xa  ;  but  except  in  Acts  xvii.  i8  ;  I  Cor. 
X.  20 ;  and  Rev.  ix.  20,  if  those  passages  be  really  exceptions, 
the  word  is  used  in  the  New  Testament  only  of  depraved  and  evil 
spirits.  I  will  only  allude  to  the  opinion  of  St.  Augustine  that  the 
demons  have  a  sort  of  subtle  body   [De  Civ.  Dei,  xv.  23  ;  xxi.  10). 


l04        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

difficulty  of  understanding  how  the  human  spirit  can  set 
iti  motion  the  obscure  machinery  of  nervous  and  muscular 
tissue  which  does  the  work  of  man.  In  the  one  case  we 
know  something  of  the  process,  but  nothing  of  the  im- 
pulse that  starts  it ;  in  the  other  case  we  know  nothing 
at  all  of  the  process. 

The  spiritual  faculty  of  Knowledge  is  exercised  by 
man  in  the  body,  and  through  the  body  as  instrument. 
It  is  therefore  subject  to  limitations  imposed  by  the 
conditions  of  the  body.  It  begins  with  sense,  and  can 
act  only  by  using,  even  while  transcending,  the  materials 
given  through  sense.  Weakness  of  the  body  may  hinder 
it ;  disorder  of  the  body  may  confuse  it ;  bodily  dis- 
cipline is  needed  for  its  perfect  working.  The  mode 
in  which  unembodied  spirits  use  this  faculty  is  unknown 
to  us.  All  spirits  alike  have  the  power  of  knowing  God — 
in  the  body,  by  the  perception  of  his  works  and  by  the 
hearing  of  his  Word ;  out  of  the  body,  by  what  sort  of 
intuition  we  know  not.  St.  Paul  asserts  that  by  our 
natural  powers  something  may  be  known  of  God  ;  the 
])romise  of  the  Old  Testament  is  that  all  men  shall  come 
to  know  the  Lord;  knowledge  of  God  is  declared  by 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  be  the  true  life  of  the  soul  : 
"  This  is  life  eternal,  that  they  should  know  thee  the 
only  true  God,  and  him  whom  thou  didst  send,  even 
Jesus  Christ."  ^ 

About  the  faculty  of  AVill  in  created  beings  there  are 
some  hard  questions  to  consider.  We  are  assured  of  its 
reality  alike  by  nature  and  by  revelation.  It  can  be  set 
aside  only  by  sophistical  evasions  which  ignore  facts  that 
we  know.  But  the  facts  which  prove  the  working  of 
Will  are  not  easily  co-ordinated  with  other  facts  equally 
certain. 

'   Rom.  i.  19;  Isa.  xi.  9;  Jer.  xxxi.  34;  John  xvii.  3. 


The  Spiritual  Creation  105 

We  note  this  first,  that  no  created  will  is  perfectly 
free.  God  is  self-determined  in  action;  but  every 
creature  is  bound  by  conditions ;  and  first,  by  the 
limitation  of  his  power.  He  cannot  effectually  will  any- 
thing which  is  impossible  for  him.  But  further,  we  know 
our  own  will  to  be  determined  in  part  by  many  influences 
within  us  and  without  us — passion,  prejudice,  habit,  the 
domination  of  another,  allurements  of  pleasure,  revulsion 
from  pain,  and  the  like.  Some  of  these  are  bodily  con- 
ditions; others  would  seem  to  aftect  spirit  apart  from 
body.  To  be  set  free  from  them,  so  as  to  act  by 
deliberate  choice  according  to  the  Will  of  God,  is  the 
hope  of  the  gospel. 

But  how  does  created  will  consist  with  the  infinity  of 
God?  There  are  two  difficulties.  In  the  first  place, 
if  all  things  be  governed  by  God's  providence,  what 
room  is  there  in  creation  for  any  will  but  his  ?  Or 
conversely,  if  there  be  any  freedom  of  will  in  the  creature, 
how  is  the  whole  creation  governed  by  God's  providence  } 
It  is  the  question  which  St.  Paul  encountered  :  "  Who 
withstandeth  his  Will  ?  "  ^  And  again,  if  the  Knowledge 
of  God  be  infinite,  all  things  that  shall  be  are  already 
known  to  him ;  and  they  cannot  be  known  if  they  are 
not  already  fixed  and  determined.  How  then  is  there 
room  for  determination  by  the  choice  of  the  creature  ? 

To  these  two  questions  no  explicit  answer  is  possible. 
St.  Paul  could  but  say  in  reply  that  even  if  man  had  no 
freedom,  even  if  he  were  passively  subject  to  the  Will 
of  God  as  the  clay  to  the  hand  of  the  potter,  he  would 
yet  have  no  complaint  against  God.  "  Shall  the  thing 
formed  say  to  him  that  formed  it.  Why  didst  thou  make 
me  thus?"  St.  Paul  was  regarding  the  moral  aspect  of 
the  question.  It  is  equally  unanswerable  if  looked  at 
'  Rom.  ix.  19. 


io6        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

from  the  intellectual  standpoint.  There  are  two  facts, 
each  of  which  is  known  to  us  in  part  by  nature,  perfectly 
by  revelation.  The  one  fact  is  that  w^e  have  the  faculty 
of  will,  and  a  measure  of  freedom ;  the  other  fact  is  that 
the  Knowledge  and  the  Will  of  God  are  infinite.  We  have 
no  means  of  correlating  these  apparently  contradictory 
facts.  Analogies  may  be  found  in  the  science  of  mathe- 
matics. We  define  parallel  straight  lines  by  saying  that 
they  never  meet,  however  far  produced.  But  the  higher 
calculus  shows  that  if  produced  to  infinity  they  meet.  In 
every  science  our  experience  is  only  of  that  which  is 
limited ;  when  we  transcend  our  experience,  reaching 
truths  that  lie  beyond,  we  find  contradictions  to  ex- 
perience ;  and  yet  our  experience  is  true  within  its  limits. 
Within  the  range  of  our  experience  we  know  that  we  are 
in  a  measure  free  and  self-determined. 

In  the  order  of  creation,  therefore,  the  Will  of  the 
Creator  can  be  opposed  by  the  will  of  the  creature. 
Regarded  in  this  relation,  the  Will  of  God  assumes 
the  character  of  Law,  and  opposition  is  lawlessness  or 
sin.  The  result  is  disorder  and  evil  in  that  which  God 
made  good.  The  possibility  of  this  evil  is  involved  in  the 
creation  of  spirit.  As  soon  as  there  comes  into  being 
a  spirit  which  is  not  God,  the  opposition  of  will  becomes 
possible.  The  objection  sometimes  raised  that  God  is 
thus  made  the  author  of  evil  is  merely  superficial.  To 
create  a  being  capable  of  evil  is  not  to  be  the  author  of 
evil,  unless  the  created  being  is  so  formed  as  to  be  under 
the  necessity  of  doing  wrong  when  the  opportunity 
occurs.  We  are  to  think  of  the  human  spirit  not  as  we 
now  know  it  in  ourselves,  hampered  and  confined  in 
will  by  acquired  habits,  but  as  originally  created  in  a 
freedom  bounded  only  by  the  limits  of  natural  possibility, 
free  to  will  the  good  as  God  wills. 


The  Spiritual  Creation  107 

A  superficial  objection  may  be  thus  easily  answered, 
but  the  truth  reaches  beyond  this  reply.  For  the  per- 
fection of  created  spirit,  the  capacity  of  sinning  is 
necessary.  The  perfection  of  every  other  creature  is  to 
fulfil  God's  purpose  passively  by  being  what  he  has  said ; 
the  perfection  of  created  spirit  is  to  fulfil  God's  purpose 
actively  by  working  together  with  him  in  knowledge  and 
will.  For  the  attainment  of  this  end  freedom  is  needed ; 
and  freedom  is  unreal  if  there  be  not  a  real  choice  ; 
and  choice  is  unreal  if  there  be  not  a  real  alternative. 
The  one  alternative  being  concord  with  the  will  of  God, 
the  second  is  necessarily  discord,  lawlessness,  or  sin. 
The  possibility  of  evil  is  therefore  involved  in  the  possi- 
bility of  good  for  created  spirit.  The  possibility  of 
evil  is  a  part  of  that  work  of  creation  which  is  wholly 
good. 

Our  knowledge  of  created  spirit  extends  to  the  human 
spirit,  and  to  those  other  spirits  which  are  called 
angels  or  demons.  All  these  alike  were  created  with  a 
capacity  of  good  and  evil ;  and  this  very  capacity  being 
their  good,  we  may  say  that  they  were  created  good. 
Their  actual  good  or  evil  depends  upon  the  exercise  of 
their  free  will.  Of  man  we  shall  have  more  to  say.  Of 
angels  and  demons  it  is  enough  to  say  that  some  have 
chosen  the  good  and  continue  in  perfect  obedience ; 
others  have  chosen  evil  and  continue  in  rebellion,  their 
choice  being  apparently  final.  Of  these  we  know  by 
revelation  that  one  great  and  malignant  spirit,  called  by 
men  Satan,  the  Devil,  the  Enemy,  is  peculiarly  engaged 
in  plotting  against  the  spiritual  welfare  of  man,  and  that 
by  his  envy  man  was  first  beguiled  to  evil.  The  demons 
are  thought  to  be  in  some  degree  subject  to  him  and 
doers  of  his  work,  but  in  many  cases  they  would  seem, 
from  the  little  we  know  of  their  doings,  to  be  not  so 


io8       The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

much  malignant  as  mischievous  and  worthless  spirits. 
St.  Paul  says  very  plainly  that  the  objects  of  pagan 
worship  were  demons  who  intercepted  the  honour  due  to 
God,  and  this  opinion  was  generally  held  during  the  first 
Christian  ages.  It  may  with  all  reserve  be  doubted 
whether  he  spoke  by  revelation,  or  was  expressing  only 
his  own  judgment  of  the  particular  cases  before  him. 
It  is  however  certain  that  demon-worship,  intended  for 
such,  prevails  in  some  regions.^ 

Regarding  the  attributes  of  God  in  relation  to  created 
spirit,  we  have  to  observe  that  the  immutability  of  God 
is,  in  respect  to  our  understanding,  the  attribute  of  Truth. 
Truth  is  the  conformity  of  expression  to  reality.  God  ex- 
pressing himself  to  his  creatures  by  his  Word,  in  creation 
or  in  revelation,  is  "  God  who  cannot  lie."-  The  Perfection 
of  God,  considered  relatively  to  created  spirits  in  rebellion, 
is  the  attribute  of  Holiness ;  by  which  attribute  he  was 
specially  revealed  in  the  Old  Testament.  Holiness  signifies 
principally  separation  from  everything  that  mars  per- 
fection, or,  in  the  language  of  Scripture,  defiles.  God  is 
"  of  purer  eyes  than  to  behold  evil."  ^  The  distinction 
of  the  Law  between  clean  and  unclean  was  intended  to 
suggest  this  Holiness  or  unmingled  Purity  of  God ;  and 
his  chosen  people  were  for  the  same  reason  to  be  separate 
from  others,  not  mingled  with  the  heathen.  The  Will  of 
God,  as  we  have  seen,  takes  the  form  of  Law  for  those 
creatures  that  have  the  power  of  free  obedience.  The 
I^ove  of  God  becomes  Goodness  when  regarded  as 
ordering  his  deahngs  with  men ;  contrasted  in  our 
thought  with  his  Holiness  and  Justice,  it  becomes  the 

'  I  Cor.  X.  20 ;  cf.  Rev.  ix.  20.  I  do  not  know  \\  liether  to 
include  among  forms  of  demon-worship  the  vagaries  of  latter-day 
Spiritualism. 

■  Titus  i.  2.  3  Y{2,h.  i.  i ;. 


The  End  of  Man  109 

attribute  of  Mercy  for  those  who  have  transgressed  his 


Law, 


Sect.  N\.—The  End  of  Man 

We  are  not  to  ask  why  God  made  man,  for  we  cannot 
think  of  his  operation  as  determined  by  any  motive 
external  to  himself.  In  their  true  nature,  thmgs  are 
what  they  are  purely  because  God  wills  them  so  to  be. 
But  since  in  the  order  of  creation  the  human  will  is  able 
to  oppose  the  Divine  Will,  we  may  ask  to  what  intent 
man  was  created.  It  is  not  enough  to  know  what  he 
now  is  We  have  no  certainty  that  he  is  what  he  was 
intended  to  be.  On  the  contrary,  we  know  by  reve- 
lation that  he  is  not  now  fulfilling  the  intention  of  God 
the  Creator.  But  before  we  can  profitably  consider 
this  failure,  we  must  see  what  is  the  end  which  he  fails 

to  attain.  .  .  ,     ,     r      i.- 

Since  man  is  created  a  spiritual  being,  with  the  faculties 

of  knowledge  and  will,  the  end  of  his  being  is  found  in 

the  exercise  of  these  faculties.    The  faculty  of  knowledge 

is  to  be  exercised  upon  the  highest  of  objects.     Man  is 

created  to  know  God.     In  this  knowledge,  according  to 

the  word  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  eternal  life  of 

man  consists.     The  capacity   of  such  knowledge  is  the 

principle  of  life ;  the  exercise  of  it  is  actual  living.     The 

faculty  of  will  is  to  be  exercised  in  harmony  with  the 

Divine  Will.    It  is  obvious  that  man  cannot  fulfil  the  end 

of  his  being  if  he  oppose  the  will  of  the  Creator.     But 

further,  it  is  only  by  the  voluntary  subordination  of  his  own 

will  to 'the  Divine  Will  that  he  can  find  perfect  happiness 

or  bliss,  for  only  in  this  way  can  he  hope  to  obtain  the 

perfect  realization  of  his  desires.     But  our  knowledge  of 


I  lo        The  Elements  of  CJiristiiDi  Doctrine 

the  love  of  God  makes  it  certain  that  he  intends  man, 
made  in  his  own  image,  to  reflect  also  his  own  Blessed- 
ness. We  conclude  therefore  that  the  end  of  man  is  to 
know  God  and  to  exercise  his  will  in  harmony  with  the 
Divine  Will. 

This  which  reason  persuades  we  find  also  broadly  set 
forth  in  revelation.  The  object  of  the  Old  Testament 
was  to  bring  men  to  the  knowledge  and  fear  of  God. 
The  perfect  man  is  he  whose  delight  is  in  the  law  of 
the  Lord,  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself,  setting  the 
pattern  of  the  perfect  life,  said  that  he  was  come  into  the 
world  to  do  the  will  of  the  Father  which  sent  "him. 

It  is  needless  to  labour  this  point,  but  we  may  glance 
at  two  other  modes  of  expressing  the  same  truth.  Man 
is  said  to  be  created  to  know  God  and  to  love  God. 
The  image  of  God  is  found  in  the  two  interior  actions  of 
the  Divine  Nature,  knowledge  and  love,  thus  reflected 
in  him.'  But  to  love  God  is  an  act  of  the  will  bent 
upon  him,  and  drawn  to  harmony  with  his  own  Will. 
That  for  which  man  is  created  is  therefore  in  the 
first  place  to  use  his  will  in  subordination  to  the  Divine 
Will.  The  fear  of  the  Lord  is  the  beginning  of  wisdom  : 
but  there  follows  upon  this  the  perfect  love  that  casteth 
out  fear.  It  is  said  again,  as  in  the  Scottish  Catechism, 
that  the  true  end  of  man  is  to  glorify  God  and  to  enjoy 
him  for  ever.  But  this  expresses  rather  a  consequence 
of  the  right  exercise  of  the  faculties  of  man's  spiritual 
nature.  To  glorify,  or  to  worship  God,  is  the  natural, 
inevitable  act  of  him  who  knows  God,  unless  the  will  be 
set  contrary.     To  enjoy  God  is  to  have  the  fruition  of 

'  August.,  De  Trin.,  xiv.  I2  :  "  llauc  igitur  trinitas  mentis  non 
proplerea  Dei  est  imago,  quia  sui  meminit  mens,  et  inlellegit  ac 
diligit  se  ;  scd  quia  potest  etiam  meminisse  et  intellegere  et  amare  a 
quo  facta  est." 


The  End  of  Man  1 1 1 

love,  which  we  know  in  tlie  two  successive  pliases  of 
desire  and  satisfaction. 

These  two  modes  of  expressing  the  truth  show  that 
in  the  order  of  creation  there  is  naturally  a  progress 
towards  the  fulfilment  of  the  end  of  man's  being.  The 
perfection  of  creation  is  indeed,  as  we  have  seen,  con- 
tained in  God's  eternal  purpose,  but  for  us,  in  the  order 
of  time,  there  is  beginning  and  process.  We  are  not 
therefore  to  suppose  man,  at  the  beginning  of  creation, 
perfect  in  development ;  we  must  regard  him  as  endowed 
with  a  capacity  of  becoming  perfect  by  fulfilling  the  end 
of  his  being,  the  exercise  of  his  spiritual  faculties. 

Questions  have  been  raised  by  theologians  about  the 
mode  in  which  man  was  intended  to  attain  the  perfection 
of  his  being,  in  case  he  did  not  oppose  his  will  to  the  Will 
of  God.  Some  of  these  questions  are  unprofitable ;  some 
can  hardly  be  avoided.  To  none  of  them  is  an  answer 
given  which  is,  strictly  speaking,  a  part  of  Christian 
doctrine ;  for  this  doctrine  deals  with  men  as  they  are 
and  as  they  may  become,  not  as  they  might  have  been. 
That  only  is  revealed  about  the  original  state  of  man 
which  is  needed  for  rightly  understanding  his  present 
state.  Those  questions  which  cannot  be  avoided  will 
arise  in  this  connection,  and  will  be  considered  in  their 
place.  It  is  sufficient  for  the  present  to  note  the 
certainty  that  if  man  had  uniformly  applied  himself  to 
know  God  and  to  love  God  according  to  the  measure 
attainable  by  him,  he  would  in  some  way  have  been 
brought  on  to  the  perfection  of  blessedness  for  which  he 
was  created. 

The  capacity  of  knowledge  in  man,  reaching  out 
beyond  the  bounds  of  sense,  finding  no  positive  limit  set 
where  progress  becomes  impossible,  and  yet  having  by 
nature  no  means  of  proceeding  further,  yearns  for  the 


1 1 2        The  Elements  of  Christian  Docti-ine 

comprehension  of  the  infinite,  and  remains  dissatisfied. 
"  All  other  things,"  says  Field,  "  seek  no  higher  perfection 
nor  greater  good  than  is  found  within  the  compass  of 
their  own  nature,  by  nature's  guiding  without  the  help 
of  any  other  thing  attaining  thereunto  ;  but  men  and 
angels,  which  seek  an  infinite  and  divine  good,  even  the 
everlasting  and  endless  happiness  which  consisteth  in 
the  vision  of  God,  at  whose  right  hand  are  pleasures  for 
evermore,  cannot  attain  their  wished  good,  which  is  so 
high  and  excellent  and  far  removed  from  them,  unless 
by  supernatural  force,  which  we  call  grace,  they  be  lifted 
unto  it."  The  end  of  man  is  to  be  the  recipient  of 
Divine  grace,  and  by  that  grace  to  be  raised  to  perfect 
knowledge,  and  lifted  up  to  high  and  heavenly  desires 
which  God  himself  alone  can  satisfy.  "  Thou  hast  made 
us  for  thyself,  and  our  heart  is  restless  until  it  rest  in 
thee."  1 

'  Field,  Of  the  Church,  bk.  i.  ch.  ii.  Aug.,  Cojifess.,  lib.  i. 
c.  I  :  "Quia  fecisti  nos  ad  te,  et  inquietum  est  cor  nostrum,  donee 
requiescat  in  te." 


CHAPTER   II 

CONCERNING    HUMAN    LIFE 

Sect.  I.— The  Original  State  of  Man 

The  record  of  creation  shows  us  man  made  in  tiie  image 
of  God,  and  after  his  Ukeness.  So  made  he  has 
dominion  over  all  other  living  creatures  on  earth,  a 
dominion  which  can  be  ascribed  only  to  his  superior 
powers  of  reason.  He  is  pronounced,  like  all  the  other 
works  of  God,  very  good.  Does  this  imply  that  he  was 
created  in  the  fulness  of  his  perfection,  or  does  it  mean 
that  he  was  perfectly  adapted  to  the  attainment  of  his 
end  ?  The  second  chapter  of  the  record  supplies  the 
answer.  Here  we  see  man  made  of  the  dust  of  the 
ground,  like  all  other  living  bodies,  and  becoming  a 
living  soul  by  the  inspiration  of  the  breath  of  hfe.  He 
is  then  described  as  placed  by  God  in  a  garden  to  dress 
it  and  to  keep  it.  There  are  two  mystical  trees,  the  Tree 
of  Life,  and  the  Tree  of  Knowledge  of  good  and  evil. 
The  fruit  of  the  former  he  may  eat,  but  the  latter  is  for- 
bidden. The  allegory  is  not  obscure.  The  knowledge 
of  good  and  evil,  as  distinct  and  opposed  one  to  the 
other,  could  come  to  him  only  by  experiment ;  and  that 
experiment  would  consist  in  setting  his  will  against  God's 
Will.  The  knowledge  was  not  forbidden  by  an  arbitrary, 
unmeaning  decree ;  in  the  nature  of  things  it  could 
be  obtained  only  by  disobedience.  That  knowledge  on 
X13  I 


114        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

the  other  hand  which  is  the  true  Ufe  of  man,  the  know- 
ledge of  God,  or  of  good  alone,  was  to  be  his  by  patient 
working  in  obedience  to  the  Will  of  God.  INIan  was 
not  therefore  created  in  the  fulness  of  his  perfection,  but 
found  himself  in  a  condition  perfectly  adapted  to  the 
attainment  of  perfection. 

There  has  been  much  fanciful  discussion  of  the  words 
which  say  that  God  breathed  into  man's  nostrils  the 
breath  of  life,  and  man  became  a  living  soul.  The 
Alexandrine  Jews  read  into  the  record  their  belief  that 
the  human  spirit  was  an  emanation  of  the  Divine  AVord, 
and  took  it  to  mean  that  man  was  composed  of  an 
earthly  substance  and  a  Divine  spirit.'  Their  interpre- 
tation was  not  without  effect  on  some  of  the  Christian 
teachers  trained  in  the  same  school.  The  words  are 
evidently  meant  to  convey  an  important  truth,  but  their 
weight  is  sufficiently  accounted  for  as  distinguishing  the 
human  soul,  with  its  capacity  of  knowing  and  loving 
God,  from  the  merely  animal  souls  of  the  brute  creation. 
Starting  from  these  very  words,  St.  Paul  contrasts  with 
this  living  soul  of  original  man  the  life-giving  spiritual 
power  of  the  second  Adam,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
Man  was  first  psychic,  he  says,  and  afterwards  became 
spiritual ;  that  is  to  say,  he  was  endowed  first  with  the 
powers  of  his  own  natural  soul  ;  he  has  since  been 
enriched  with  higher  spiritual  gifts. - 

The  mode  of  the  production  of  man  from  earth  is  not 
revealed.  The  nature  of  animal  life,  the  building  up  of 
particles  of  matter  into  a  living  organism,  is  left  to  the 
investigation  or  the  contented  ignorance  of  human 
science.      The  life  of  man,  regarded  as  merely  animal,  is 

'   Philo,    De  Mundi  Opijkio,  p.   30  E  :  'S.vvQi-rov  ihai  (prtfftu  «'« 
yfwSovs  oi}(Tias  Ka\  iruevfiaTOS  Bfiov. 
■  I  Cor.  XV.  45-48.     Sec  Note  C. 


TJie  Original  State  of  Man  1 1  5 

put  by  revelation  upon  the  same  level  with  that  of  all 
other  animals.  Belief  in  the  specific  creation  of  man 
stands  or  falls  with  belief  in  the  specific  creation  of  other 
species.  If  the  origin  of  these  be  traced,  probably  or 
certainly,  to  an  evolutionary  process,  the  origin  of  the 
animal  man  is  presumably  the  same.  But  since  man  is 
by  nature  not  merely  animal  but  also  spiritual,  there 
seems  to  be  an  advance  of  another  kind  in  the  process, 
if  there  be  such,  from  animal  to  perfect  man.  It  is  a 
step  as  marked  as  that  which  comes  in  the  process  from 
inorganic  matter  to  a  living  organism.  However  that 
be,  it  is  important  to  remember  that  nothing  is  revealed 
on  the  subject.  The  nature  of  this  step,  though  unlike 
anything  else  investigated  by  physical  science,  is  matter 
for  scientific  inquiry.  Such  inquiry  does  not  raise  any 
question  strictly  speaking  theological,  however  interest- 
ing it  be  to  theologians.  Still  less  does  it  come  within 
the  limits  of  Christian  doctrine.  We  are  concerned  only 
with  the  truth  that,  whatever  such  step  there  be,  it  is  the 
work  of  God  the  Creator.  Such  a  step  may  possibly  be 
indicated  in  the  words  which  say  that  God  breathed  into 
man's  nostrils  the  breath  of  life.  But  the  words  do  not 
necessarily  bear  that  meaning,  and  we  cannot  infer  it 
from  them  as  a  truth  of  revelation. 

Many  theologians  have  thought  it  necessary  to  suppose 
that  man  was  originally  created  with  perfect  knowledge 
of  all  things  naturally  knowable.  But  this  idea,  when 
analysed,  is  found  to  involve  great  difficulties.  It 
involves  the  further  supposition  that  knowledge  was  con- 
veyed to  man  otherwise  than  by  the  use  of  his  natural 
organs,  a  miracle  for  which  there  is  no  evidence.  It  is 
not  supported  by  any  warrant  of  revelation ;  for  only  by 
a  great  straining  of  language  can  it  be  deduced  from  the 
statement  that  Adam  gave  names  to  all  living  creatures. 


1 1 6        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

This  statement  may,  indeed,  imply  the  exact  contrary ; 
it  may  indicate  the  first  beginnings  of  language  in  hmiian 
experience.  Nor  is  such  knowledge  necessary  for  the 
perfection  of  original  man.  For  this  it  is  sufficient  that 
he  was  created  with  perfect  faculties  of  knowledge,  so 
that  all  the  knowledge  he  should  acquire  would  be  the 
natural  consequence  of  his  creation. 

The  question  whether  man  ever  existed  in  a  state  of 
pure  nature  is  one  that  we  may  put  aside.  We  know 
him  in  his  original  state  only  as  endowed  with  super- 
natural gifts.  These  are  an  addition  'to  his  natural 
faculties.  He  would  be  true  man  without  them  ;  he  may 
lose  them  and  remain  true  man.  They  are  represented 
by  the  allegory  of  the  Tree  of  Life.  Employed  in  the 
record  of  creation,  this  allegory  is  resumed  in  the 
Revelation  of  St.  John,  where  it  is  connected  with 
the  new  creation  of  the  new  heaven  and  the  new  earth.^ 
The  meaning  of  it  is  thus  determined.  The  fruit  of  the 
Tree  of  Life  is  that  supernatural  grace  which  raises  man 
beyond  his  own  natural  powers.  Such  grace  was  freely 
bestowed  upon  him  in  his  original  state. 

We  know  by  experience  and  by  revelation  the  efifect  of 
grace  in  man  as  he  now  is ;  the  effect  upon  original  man 
is  less  definitely  known.  We  are  assured  that  if  he  had 
continued  in  perfect  obedience  to  God  he  would  not 
have  been  liable  to  death.  After  all  allowance  made  for 
the  mystical  sense  in  which  death  and  life  are  spoken  of 
in  Scripture,  it  seems  clear  that  ordinary  physical  death 
is  here  intended.       But  there  seems  to  be  no  reason  for 

'  In  LXX.  and  N.T.,  rb  ivKov  t^s  Ci^^s.  Gen.  ii.  9;  iii.  22  j 
Rev.  ii.  7  ;  xxii.  2,  14.  In  the  Book  of  Proverbs,  iii.  18,  the  Tree  of 
Life  is  identified  with  the  Divine  Wisdom.  In  Prov.  xi.  30  and 
xiii.  12  occurs  a  similar  phrase,  SevSpoy  ^oi^s,  apparently  used  more 
generally.     The  use  of  the  article  varies. 


1 


The  Original  State  of  Man  1 1 7 

supposing  that  the  human  body  is  naturally  different  in 
this  respect  from  other  animal  bodies ;  it  was  made 
subject  to  the  same  law  of  growth  and  decay.  It  was 
therefore  by  the  effect  of  supernatural  grace  that  man 
would  be  preserved  from  death.  But  further,  since  life 
is  so  emphatically  spoken  of  as  consisting  in  the  know- 
ledge of  God,  we  may  safely  infer  that  by  the  fruit  of  the 
Tree  of  Life  is  meant  a  strengthening  and  illuminating 
of  the  understanding  which  should  enable  man  to  lay 
hold  of  the  truth  of  God  presented  to  him  in  whatever 
manner.  The  natural  life  of  the  body  and  the  spiritual 
life  would  alike  be  preserved  and  amplified  by  the  gift 
of  grace. ^ 

The  moral  condition  of  original  man  was  in  the  first 
place  one  of  innocence.  This  quality  is  purely  negative. 
Its  root  is  in  ignorance  of  evil.  It  consists  in  the 
absence  of  any  determination  of  the  will  against  the  Will 
of  God.  The  freedom  from  shame,  noted  in  the  record 
of  creation,  is  the  characteristic  mark  of  innocence. 
"  They  were  both  naked,  the  man  and  his  wife,  and  were 
not  ashamed."  But  the  will  of  man  being  free,  every  act 
of  obedience  would  raise  him  from  the  state  of  innocence 
to  the  higher  condition  of  actual  and  habitual  righteous- 
ness ;  and  this  righteousness,  being  fortified  by  the 
Divine  grace,  ^yould  be  raised  to  a  supernatural  degree. 
In  this  original  righteousness,  partly  natural,  partly 
supernatural,  theologians  have  agreed  to  find  the  likeness 
to  God,  as  distinct  from  the  image,  in  which  man  was 
created.  They  say  that  man  is  naturally  constituted  in 
the  image  of  God;  his  manhood  consists  therein,  and 
therefore  he  cannot  altogether  lose  that  image  without 
ceasing  to  be  man ;  but  the  likeness  to  God  after  which 

'   Compare  John  x.    lo,    "I  came  that  they  may  have  life,  and 
may  have  it  abundantly." 


1 1 8        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

he   was   created   was  to  be  attained   by  grace   and  by 
obedience,  and  might  be  wholly  lost. 

In  sum,  man  was  created  with  his  natural  human 
faculties  in  perfect  order  for  his  proper  course  of  life, 
for  the  acquisition  of  all  natural  knowledge,  and  for  the 
right  determination  of  his  will.  To  these  natural  faculties 
were  added  the  supernatural  endowments  of  grace,  pre- 
serving them,  and  raising  them  to  a  higher  order  of 
experience.  He  was  created  in  perfect  innocence,  and 
was  capable,  at  least,  of  natural  and  supernatural 
righteousness. 

Sect.  II. —  The  Fallen  State  of  Man 

From  this  original  state  man  fell  by  disobedience. 
The  consciousness  of  being  in  a  fallen  state  appears  in 
many  human  traditions,  which  may  preserve  some  faint 
record  of  the  event,  or  may  be  the  result  only  of  attempts 
to  explain  the  present  fact.  One  form  of  the  tradition 
is  included  in  Holy  Scripture,  and  is  thus  to  be  received 
as  a  divinely  authenticated  explanation.  It  is  needless 
to  distinguish  between  history  and  allegory  in  reading 
the  account  of  the  Fall.  We  have  only  to  read  what  is 
written  for  our  learning. 

The  Tree  of  Knowledge  of  good  and  evil  corresponds 
to  the  Tree  of  Life.  As  the  one  stands  for  the  know- 
ledge of  God,  to  be  attained  by  submission  to  his  will, 
so  the  other  stands  for  the  experimental  knowledge  of 
evil,  and  its  distinction  from  good,  which  could  •  be 
attained  only  by  rebellion  against  the  will  of  God.  This 
was  forbidden,  not  by  an  arbitrary  decree,  but  because 
it  was  in  itself  contrary  to  the  good  of  man,  its  attain- 
ment being  an  aberration  from  his  true  end.  In  human 
laws  there  is  a  distinction  between  that  which  is  wrong 


The  Fallen  State  of  Man  119 

in  itself  and  that  which  is  wrong  only  because  it  is 
forbidden.  The  same  holds  good  of  those  Divine  laws 
which  are  adapted  by  an  economy  to  a  temporary  state 
of  things ;  for  these  are  indeed  a  kind  of  human  law. 
But  the  distinction  does  not  apply  to  the  absolute  Divine 
law.  God  wills  all  good ;  and  his  law  is  the  expression 
of  that  will  to  the  creature.  His  commands  are  good ; 
and  we  may  say  with  equal  truth  that  he  forbids  a  thing 
because  it  is  evil,  and  that  a  thing  is  evil  because  he 
forbids  it.  Disregard  of  the  Divine  law  is  sin ;  and 
human  sin  began  when  man  formed  the  purpose  of 
acting  not  according  to  the  will  of  God  but  according 
to  his  own  will.^ 

The  points  which  stand  out  clearly  in  the  record 
of  the  Fall,  and  which  are  referred  to  elsewhere  in 
Scripture  as  of  doctrinal  importance,  are  these  :  (i)  Man 
was  tempted  by  the  devil,  of  whom  the  serpent  is  the 
ordinary  symbol.  This  great  spirit  had,  therefore,  him- 
self become  evil  beforehand.  (2)  The  beginning  of  sin 
was  in  woman,  who  in  turn  tempted  man  to  his  fall. 
(3)  The  first  step  towards  sin  was  doubt  of  the  word  of 
God  declaring  that  death  would  be  the  consequence 
of  disobedience ;  the  woman  was  beguiled.  (4)  The 
second  step  was  indulgence  of  desire.  "  When  the 
woman  saw  that  the  tree  was  good  for  food,  and  that 
it  was  a  delight  to  the  eyes,  and  that  the  tree  was  to  be 
desired  to  make  one  wise,  she  took  of  the  fruit  thereof 
and  did  eat."  The  description  answers  to  St.  John's 
threefold  expression  of  all  that  is  contrary  to  God  in 
the  world  :  "the  lust  of  the  flesh,  and  the  lust  of  the 
eyes,  and  the  vain-glory  of  life."     (5)  The  first  human 

'  I  John  iii.  4  :  i\  afxapria  io-rlv  r)  avofxia.  Sin  is  lawlessness  ;  that 
is  to  say,  not  a  mere  act  of  transgression,  but  a  determination  to 
disregard  law. 


120        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

sin  was  an  act  of  one  man,  or  rather  of  one  pair,  male 
and  female,  from  whom  all  men  are  naturally  descended.^ 

The  first  result  of  the  Fall  was  death.  The  decree 
was  :  "  In  the  day  that  thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt 
surely  die."  This  clearly  means  that  by  sin  man  became 
at  once  liable  to  death.  The  process  of  natural  decay, 
which  would  otherwise  have  been  hindered  by  super- 
natural grace,  began  its  course,  and  man  was  already 
dying.-  But  more  is  meant.  Natural  death  and  mys- 
tical death  are  constantly  joined  in  the  teaching  of 
Scripture.  The  death  which  was  the  instant  penalty  of 
sin  must  include  the  loss  of  that  grace  by  which  man  was 
raised  to  a  supernatural  life  consisting  in  the  intimate 
knowledge  of  God.  His  natural  capacity  for  knowing 
God  remained ;  he  was  still  a  spiritual  being  with  spiritual 
life ;  but  this  was  brought  down  to  a  level  which,  in 
comparison  with  his  previous  condition,  may  be  called 
death.  He  was  driven  out  of  Paradise,  and  forbidden 
access  to  the  Tree  of  Life. 

The  death  which  is  the  wages  of  sin,  whether  animal 
or  spiritual,  is  thus  seen  to  be  consequent  on  the  loss 
of  grace.  But  why  this  loss  ?  It  is  a  penalty  for  the 
guilt  of  disobedience,  exacted  by  the  justice  of  God. 
We  must  here  step  warily  and  measure  the  precise 
value  of  words.  To  be  guilty  is  to  be  liable  to  a  penalty. 
We  derive  our  terms  from  the  ordinary  course  of  justice. 
But  in  human  judgments  there  is  always  something  of 
the  arbitrary.  Offence  and  penalty  are  roughl)'  adjusted ; 
offence  and  guilt  are  related  by  fallible  estimates.  Guilt 
and  penalty,  again,  are  related  by  an  arbitrary  decree  ; 

'   I  John  ii.  i6  ;  Rom.  v.  12  ;  i  Cor.  xv.  22. 

-  Athan.,  De  Incarn.,  p.  56  C,  ed.  Colon:  Ei  5e  irapaPaTeu  nal 
crTpa<pfVTei  yivoivro  (pavKoi,  yivdiaKouv  kavrovs  ttiv  iv  6audrcf>  Kara 
(pvffLP  cpdopav  {nrofjLfViiV, 


The  Fallen  State  of  Man  1 2 1 

the  penalty  may  be  suspended  or  remitted,  while  the 
guilt  remains.  In  transferring  the  terms  to  the  judgments 
of  God  we  must  put  aside  these  elements  of  imperfection. 
The  loss  of  supernatural  grace  was  imposed  as  the 
penalty  for  disobedience,  not  by  an  arbitrary  decree, 
but  because  of  its  absolute  fitness ;  and  being  so  imposed 
it  followed  immediately.  Grace  was  given  to  original 
man  as  a  means  to  the  more  perfect  attainment  of  his 
true  end.  Therefore,  when  his  will  was  averted  to 
another  end,  this  grace,  if  still  left  in  his  possession, 
would  have  been  wasted ;  and  it  was  consequently 
withdrawn.  Immortality,  when  man  had  lost  the  way 
to  that  blessedness  which  was  his  true  end,  would  have 
been  for  him  the  worst  of  miseries.  Death  was  not  the 
less  a  penalty ;  but  it  was  a  penalty  in  some  measure 
remedial,  bearing  witness  to  the  identity  of  justice  and 
mercy  in  the  Divine  judgment.  Death  was  ordained  for 
the  ending  of  sin.^ 

The  first  result  of  the  Fall,  then,  starts  from  the  guilt 
of  disobedience,  the  consciousness  of  which  appears  in 
the  sense  of  shame  ;  there  follows  immediately  the  penalty, 
which  is  loss  of  supernatural  grace  and,  consequently 
upon  this,  animal  and  spiritual  death. 

The  second  result  of  the  Fall  is  the  corruption  of  man's 
nature.  To  set  his  own  will  against  the  will  of  God 
was  to  mar  the  work  of  God  in  himself.  Created  free 
to  will,  he  would  find  the  perfection  of  his  nature  in 
willing  as  God  willed.  By  willing  otherwise  he  set  up 
a  warp  in  his  nature,  which  is  known  as  concupiscence. 
We  mean  by  this  a  depraved  inclination  to  what  is  wrong, 
even  when  it  is  clearly  seen  to  be  wrong,  and  perhaps  the 
more  because  it  is  seen  to  be  wrong.  This  element  of 
perverseness  in  human  nature  is  apt  to  be  neglected  by 
'   So  Irenaeus,  iii.  37  (23). 


122        The  Elevients  of  Chj-istian  Doctrine 

moral  philosophers,  because  of  the  difficulty  of  work- 
ing it  into  any  system ;  but  poets,  even  the  most  super- 
ficial, have  observed  it,  and  the  mystery  of  it  has  inspired 
some  of  the  greatest  tragedies.^  The  facts  of  human 
experience  are  acknowledged  by  the  Divine  word,  and 
further  illuminated.  St.  Paul  shows  that  perverseness 
extends  to  a  crippling  of  the  will.  "  The  good  which  I 
would  I  do  not ;  but  the  evil  which  I  would  not,  that  I 
practise."  He  speaks  of  it  as  "  the  law  of  sin  which  is  in 
my  members,"  and  as  "  sin  which  dwelleth  in  me."  It 
is  in  effect  "the  bondage  of  corruption."  The  freedom 
in  which  man  was  created  is  impaired  by  this  per- 
verseness, which  in  a  measure  determines  him  to  evil 
action." 

The  corruption  of  nature  is  perhaps  not  confined  to 
morals  only,  or  to  the  action  of  will.  The  disorder 
would  presumably  extend  to  the  faculty  of  knowledge. 
There  may  be  some  truth  in  the  rhetorical  declaration  of 
a  famous  preacher,  that  an  Aristotle  was  but  the  rubbish 
of  an  Adam,  if  we  understand  it  not  of  acquired  know- 
ledge lost,  but  of  natural  capacities  impaired.  The 
capacity  of  knowing  God,  in  particular,  we  may  suppose 
to  be  weakened.  But  of  this  there  is  no  certain  revela- 
tion. Still  less  is  there  of  that  which  might  equally  be 
assumed  as  probable,  a  certain  degeneration  of  the 
bodily  powers.  It  has  indeed  been  thought  that  some 
such  degeneration  of  mind  and  body  is  indicated  in  the 
allegory  of  thorns  and  thistles  by  which  the  labour  of 
fallen  man  should  be  hindered ;  but  the  figure  suits  with 
equal  fitness  the  moral  hindrances  of  concupiscence. 

'  Among  tlie  most  striking  expressions  of  it  are  those  in  the  well- 
known  lines  of  Ovid — "Nitimur  in  vetitum  semper,  cupimusque 
negata  "  and  "  \'ideo  meliora  proboque,  Deteriora  sequor." 

-  Rom.  vii.  17-23  ;  viii.  21. 


The  Fallen  State  of  Man  123 

What  man  became  by  sin,  that  he  continued  to  be  in 
his  descendants.  He  transmitted  to  them  his  nature  as 
it  was ;  deprived  of  the  support  of  supernatural  grace  and 
righteousness  ;  marred  by  the  intrusion  of  concupiscence. 
This  fallen  state,  into  which  every  man  is  born,  is  known 
as  Original  Sin.  It  is  sin,  not  in  the  same  way  in  which 
the  conscious  rebellion  of  the  individual  is  sin,  but  as 
being  a  declension  from  the  good  which  is  proper  to  man, 
according  to  the  purpose  of  the  Creator.^  It  carries  with 
it  the  guilt  of  sin,  and  the  penalty  ;  for,  as  St.  Paul  says, 
"  Death  reigned  from  Adam  until  Moses,  even  over  them 
that  had  not  sinned  after  the  likeness  of  Adam's  trans- 
gression." His  argument  is  that  until  Moses  there  was 
no  universal  positive  law,  for  the  breach  of  which  death 
was  the  appointed  penalty  ;  and  yet  death  reigned.  But 
man  dies  only  by  reason  of  the  guilt  of  sin.  Therefore 
the  guilt  must  have  passed  in  some  way  from  Adam 
to  all  his  seed.  All  are  by  nature  children  of  wrath. 
Death  passed  unto  all  men,  for  that  all  sinned.  "  In 
Adam,"  he  says  elsewhere,  "all  die."  As  St.  Thomas 
Aquinas  puts  it,  all  men  are  to  be  regarded  as  in  some 
sort  a  single  person,  sinning  in  Adam.- 

The  Scotist  theologians  of  the  Middle  Ages  held  that 
original  sin  was  nothing  else  but  the  loss  of  supernatural 
righteousness.  This  explanation  is  sufficient  to  account 
for  the  universal  imputation  of  guilt,  if  it  be  considered 
that  man  was  created  expressly  for  supernatural  advance- 
ment. It  is  a  paradox,  but  true,  that  to  be  supernaturally 
endowed  is  natural  to  man ;  for  the  true  nature  of 
a  thing  is  that  which   God  intends.     To  fail  of  super- 

'  Sum.  TheoL,  1-2,  109.2  :  "  Peccare  nihil  aliud  est  quam  deficere 
a  bono  quod  convenit  alicui  secundum  suam  naturam." 

-  Rom.  V.  12-14  ;  I  Cor.  xv.  22  ;  Eph.  ii.  3.  Sum.  Theot.,  1-2. 
81.  I. 


124       TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

natural  advancement  is  then  to  fall  short  of  the  good 
which  is  the  proper  end  of  man's  being;  it  is  to  run 
counter  to  God's  law.  It  is  therefore  sin,  and  death. 
But  this  does  not  account  for  all  the  facts ;  for  the 
element  of  perverseness  in  human  nature  as  we  know  it ; 
for  those  beginnings  of  evil  which  the  Psalmist  describes 
in  strong  hyperbole  :  "  As  soon  as  they  are  born  they  go 
astray  and  speak  lies."  Man  comes  into  the  world  not 
liable  only  to  corruption,  but  already  in  the  grip  of 
corruption.  Forthwith  upon  the  Fall,  says  St.  Athanasius, 
men  began  to  die,  and  corruption  thenceforth  grew  upon 
them,  developing  throughout  the  whole  race,  even  beyond 
the  measure  of  nature.^  Not  only  is  human  nature  left 
without  the  succours  of  grace  to  the  natural  process  of 
decay,  but  every  man  comes  into  the  world  with  his 
nature  already  corrupted.  He  has  not  the  full  exercise 
of  his  natural  free  will ;  he  is  held  in  the  bondage  of 
concupiscence. 

There  is  therefore  a  fact  of  human  consciousness, 
which  is  accounted  for  in  Christian  doctrine  as  original 
sin.  The  name,  and  the  fuller  development  of  teaching 
on  the  subject,  are  proper  to  ^^'estern  theology,  and 
indeed  to  the  system  built  up  by  the  genius  of 
St.  Augustine  against  the  errors  of  Pelagius.  But 
however  elaborately  developed,  the  teaching  rests  on  the 
simple  truth  of  revelation  that  every  man  has  received 
from  his  fathers  a  nature  that  is  corrupted  and  guilty 
before  God.  The  manner  of  this  transmission  of  guilt 
and  corruption  is  not  revealed,  nor  have  theologians  been 
happy  in  their  attempted  explanations.     It  is  one  of  the 

'  Athan.,  De  Iiicar/i.,^^.  57,58:  TovrovZiyevofxivov  ol  fjLtv&vQptjnrui. 
aveOvrjaKov,  r)  5«  ipdopa  Aoiirhv  kut^  avrwi/  ^Kjxa^iv,  koI  ■KXeiov  rod  Kara 


Actions  and  Habits  125 

inexplicable  facts  of  life  with  which  we  have  to  reckon. 
Christian  doctrine  does  reckon  with  it,  faithful,  as  always, 
to  the  fact.^ 


Sect.  III. — Actions  ami  Habits 

Life  is  manifested  in  action.  Human  actions  in  the 
state  of  pure  nature  are  conceived  as  determined  partly 
by  the  inevitable  laws  of  nature,  that  is  to  say,  by  the 
sovereign  will  of  the  Creator,  partly  by  man's  free  will. 
Among  the  laws  of  nature  are  to  be  included  the  habits 
or  dispositions  of  man  himself.  These  are  partly  inbred, 
partly  acquired  by  repeated  action.  Those  that  are 
inbred  or  implanted  by  the  Creator,  so  long  as  man's 
nature  remains  in  its  integrity,  can  lead  him  to  nothing 
but  good  ;  those  acquired  under  the  same  conditions  will 
be  equally  wholesome.  In  this  condition,  then,  we  may 
say  that  human  actions  would  be  determined  (i)  by 
external  laws  of  nature,  (2)  by  good  habits,  and  (3)  by 
man's  free  will. 

In  the  state  of  original  righteousness  there  will  be 
added  to  these  determining  forces  the  aid  of  God's  grace 
controlling  and  directing  the  human  will.  This  aid 
may  be  distinguished  as  of  two  kinds,  ordinary  and 
special ;  the  former  infusing  into  the  soul  what  is  known 
as  habitual  grace,  a  general  disposition  to  seek  after 
supernatural  good  and  to  do  what  is  necessary  for  its 

'  Robert  Browning,  in  Gold  Hair,  suggests  this  as  the  prime 
reason  for  holding  to  the  Christian  faith. 

"  I  still,  to  suppose  it  true,  for  my  part, 

See  reasons  and  reasons  ;  this,  to  begin  ; 

'Tis  the  faith  that  launched  point-blank  her  dart 
At  the  head  of  a  lie — taught  Original  Sin, 

The  Corruption  of  Man's  Heart." 


126        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

attainment ;    the  latter    moving    the    will    to    determine 
particular  acts  of  the  same  tendency. 

In  the  state  of  fallen  nature  the  human  soul  is  deprived 
of  habitual  grace ;  but  the  history  of  revelation  affords 
conclusive  proof  that  special  aid  of  this  kind  is  still 
granted.  That  history  is  indeed  nothing  else  but  a  record 
of  such  special  graces,  and  the  use  or  abuse  of  them  by 
men.  But  further,  in  the  fallen  state  an  evil  habit, 
called  concupiscence  or  perverseness,  is  in  every  man 
by  birth,  and  particular  evil  habits  are  rapidly  acquired 
as  the  result  of  perverse  action  ;  by  which  means  the 
freedom  of  the  human  will  is  impaired.  ^Ve  have,  more- 
over, to  reckon  with  the  instigation  of  the  devil  and  his 
attendant  spirits,  as  also  of  evil  men  moving  their  fellows 
to  perverse  deeds.  These  are  known  as  the  temptations 
of  the  Devil  and  the  World,  as  the  moving  force  of 
concupiscence  is  called  the  temptation  of  the  Flesh.  In 
the  state  of  fallen  nature,  therefore,  human  actions  are 
determined  (i)  by  the  external  laws  of  nature,  (2)  by 
inbred  habits  implanted  by  the  Creator,  (3)  by  good 
habits  acquired  as  the  result  of  good  actions,  (4)  by  evil 
habits  inbred  or  acquired,  (5)  by  external  temptations 
to  evil,  (6)  by  an  impaired  will,  and  lastly,  (7)  by  the 
special  aid  of  God  moving  the  will  in  the  direction  of 
supernatural  good. 

By  the  first  three  of  these  forces  fallen  man  is  moved 
to  good  actions  according  to  the  will  of  God  who  made 
him.  Such  are  the  ordinary  duties  of  life,  the  labours  of 
the  hand,  the  generation  and  the  rearing  of  children,  and 
the  cultivation,  social  or  individual,  of  the  natural  virtues. 
The  image  of  God  in  which  he  was  created  is  not  wholly 
obliterated  in  man  by  the  corruption  of  his  nature.  He 
still  has  the  spiritual  power  of  knowing  and  willing  the 
things  of  God ;  but  this  power  is  grievously  impaired,  so 


Actions  and  Habits  127 

that  he  judges  amiss.  He  can  still  see  within  himself  as 
in  a  mirror  the  reflection  of  the  Divine  likeness  ;  but  all 
is  confused  by  the  intrusion  of  evil  habits  and  the  sug- 
gestion of  external  temptations,  so  that  he  forgets,  as  St. 
Athanasius  says,  that  he  is  created  in  the  image  of  God, 
and  he  fails  to  order  his  life  accordingly.  Human  actions 
therefore  are  not  wholly  bad,  are  never  determined  by 
pure  malice,  and  even  at  the  worst  contain  some  element 
of  a  good  purpose  ;  but  on  the  other  hand  they  are  never 
unmixed  with  evil.  "We  are  all  become  as  one  that  is 
unclean,"  says  the  prophet,  "  and  all  our  righteousnesses 
are  as  a  polluted  garment."  Those  who  are  in  this  con- 
dition— who  are  in  the  flesh,  as  St.  Paul  has  it — cannot 
please  God.^ 

A  question  has  nevertheless  been  raised  by  theologians, 
whether  fallen  man  can  by  his  natural  powers  keep  the 
commandments,  either  of  the  natural  or  of  the  revealed 
law,  and  in  particular  whether  he  can  keep  that  first  and 
greatest  commandment  which  is  to  love  God  above  all. 
It  is  argued  that  for  God  to  command  what  is  impossible 
is  against  his  justice,  and  that  to  love  God  is  natural  to 
man,  and  not  only  to  man,  but  also  to  every  created 
being  after  the  measure  of  its  power.  Therefore  it  is  not 
impossible  for  man  to  love  God  with  all  his  heart  and 
with  all  his  soul  and  with  all  his  strength.  And  further, 
it  may  be  said,  we  have  in  the  Psalter  the  most  perfect 
expression  of  the  love  which  man  owes  to  God  ;  but  the 
Psalter  is  the  expression  of  the  heart  of  fallen  man. 

To  the  last  point  the  reply  is  obvious,  that  in  the 
Psalter  we  have  the  expression  not  of  the  unaided  powers 
of  human  nature,  but  of  human  nature  aided  by  special 
grace.     The  commandments  of  the  natural  law,   being 

'  Isa.  Ixiv.  6  ;  Rom.  viii.  8.  Athanas.,  Contra  Gentes,  p.  8. 
Sum.   Theol.,  1-2.    109.   2.     See  Note  D. 


128        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

a  part  of  the  order  of  creation,  are  designed  for  man 
as  unfallen,  who  could  therefore  keep  them.  It  is  no 
imputation  upon  the  justice  of  God  to  say  that  man  as  he 
is  now  born  into  the  world,  far  removed  from  original 
righteousness,  cannot  observe  them.  The  command- 
ments of  the  revealed  law  were  given  to  man  already 
fallen,  and  are  adapted  to  his  case.  These  he  is  able  to 
keep.  St,  Paul  was  bold  to  say  that  as  touching  the 
righteousness  that  is  in  the  law  he  was  found  blameless ; 
but  this  righteousness  he  counted  refuse,  and  the  very 
purpose  of  the  law,  he  taught,  was  to  render  men  dis- 
satisfied with  their  condition.^  The  great  commandment 
concerning  the  love  of  God  can  be  kept  by  men 
according  to  the  measure  of  their  existing  powers, 
perfectly  by  unfallen  man,  imperfectly  by  fallen  man 
with  all  that  remains  unspoilt  of  his  heart  and  soul  and 
strength. 

Fallen  man  therefore  has  no  actions  entirely  unmixed 
with  evil.  The  sinful  habit  infects  them  all.  But  this 
truth  needs  careful  guarding  on  two  sides.  The  natural 
virtues  in  fallen  man  are  true  virtues.  They  are  not,  as 
was  rashly  said,  splendid  vices.  They  fail  to  please  God, 
because  they  fall  short  of  that  perfection  for  which  he 
created  man.  They  are  good  works,  but  they  are  not 
done  as  God  willed  and  commanded  them  to  be  done ; 
they  are  tarnished  by  the  effect  of  the  sinful  habit.  They 
have  a  certain  moral  value  or  merit,  as  being  done  by 
man's  will,  however  impaired  its  freedom,  in  obedience 
to  Divine  command  or  to  the  impulse  of  the  Creator. 
Again,  the  inability  of  fallen  man  to  fulfil  the  Divine  law 
does  not  free  him  from  the  imputation  of  guilt.  The 
inability  is  a  part  of  his  sinfulness,  and  though  it 
diminish  the  particular  guilt  of  a  particular  action  even  to 
'  Phil.  iii.  6  ;  Rom.  vii.   7-25  ;  Gal.  iii.  24. 


Actions  and  Habits  129 

vanishing  point,  as  in  the  case  of  complete  ignorance,  yet 
the  general  guilt  of  fallen  nature  covers  all  such  actions. 
It  is  probable  that  no  sin  committed  by  fallen  man  can 
equal  in  guilt  a  simple  act  of  disobedience  on  the  part  of 
unfallen  man  ;  but  every  action  which  is  tarnished  by  the 
habit  of  sin  shares  the  condemnation  passed  upon  the 
habit.  By  continuing  in  a  course  of  sin  a  man  may  add 
to  his  incapacity  for  doing  right,  and  take  yet  more  away 
from  the  freedom  of  his  will ;  yet  he  clearly  does  not  by 
this  diminish  the  general  guilt  of  his  subsequent  action. 
What  is  true  of  progressive  is  true  also  of  initial  incapacity. 
The  injury  done  to  man's  freedom  does  not  therefore 
undo  him  as  a  moral  agent  or  deprive  him  of  responsibility, 
though  in  the  judgment  of  particular  actions  there  is  room 
for  the  many  or  the  few  stripes  according  to  the  capacity 
of  the  agent.^ 

Man  being  created  to  live  in  society,  the  corruption  of 
nature  extends  to  his  social  order.  This  is  the  ruin  of 
the  world.  The  bond  of  social  order  is  human  law, 
which  is  partly  an  expression  of  natural  law,  partly  the 
positive  expression  of  collective  human  will.  In  the 
state  of  unfallen  nature  such  law  would  be  an  accurate 
reflection  of  the  Divine  will,  organizing  man  for  the  per- 
fection of  his  natural  life.  In  the  state  of  fallen  nature 
human  law  is  liable  to  a  twofold  corruption.  In  the  first 
place,  the  community  as  well  as  the  individual,  either 
from  ignorance  or  from  malice,  may  choose  evil  rather 
than  good.  Human  law  will  then  command  actions 
which  are  definitely  wrong.  Under  this  head  we  bring 
all  evil  customs,  public  injustice,  and  tyranny.  War  in 
general  springs  from  the  same  source,  though  a  particular 
act  of  war  may  be  good  by  virtue  of  its  particular  end. 
But  however  great  this  corruption,  human  society  does 

'  Luke  xii.  47. 

K 


I30        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

not,  any  more  than  a  human  individual,  become  wholly 
bad  ;  the  ruler  is  still  the  minister  of  God.^ 

The  second  corruption  of  society  is  found  in  the 
toleration  of  evil.  This  is  a  necessary  consequence  of 
the  fallen  state,  extending,  as  we  shall  see,  even  to 
renovated  human  society  in  the  Church.  It  is  necessary 
because  of  the  impossibility  in  many  cases  of  discerning 
accurately  between  good  and  evil,  and  also  because  man, 
while  imperfect  himself,  cannot  root  out  the  imperfection 
of  his  fellows.  The  aspiration  of  the  Psalmist,  "  I  shall 
soon  destroy  all  the  ungodly  that  are  in  the  land,"  is  an 
ideal  beyond  the  reach  of  fallen  man.  But  there  are 
degrees  of  such  toleration,  which  mark  the  progress  of 
the  corruption  or  the  recovery  of  human  society. 

Harder  to  understand  is  the  toleration  of  evil  by  the 
will  of  God.  In  the  generations  gone  by,  says  St.  Paul, 
God  suffered  all  the  nations  to  walk  in  their  own  ways, 
though  leaving  himself  not  without  witness  among  them. 
These  times  of  ignorance,  he  says,  God  overlooked. 
The  nations  were  left  to  frame  their  own  laws  and 
customs  according  to  the  light  of  nature,  however 
obscured,  and  these  laws  and  customs  had  a  sanction 
from  the  Divine  permission,  though  they  tolerated  or 
even  commanded  things  that  were  evil.  But  more  is  to 
be  said.  The  Divine  Law  given  by  revelation  contains 
precepts  which  directly  countenance  actions  contrary  to 
the  will  of  God.  Of  the  divorce  allowed  by  the  Law  of 
Moses  our  Lord  said,  "  For  your  hardness  of  heart  he 
wrote  you  this  commandment."  \\\  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  the  law  of  the  Aaronic  priesthood  is  spoken  of 
as  a  carnal  commandment,  which  is  disannulled  because 
of  its  weakness  and  unprofitableness.  The  precepts  of 
the  Law,  says  St.  Paul,  were  weak  and  beggarly  rudiments. 
'  Rom.  xiii.  4. 


Actions  and  Habits  131 

Our  Lord  said  that  he  was  come  to  fulfil,  not  to  destroy 
the  Law  ;  but  his  mode  of  completing  it  indicates  grievous 
imperfections.^ 

The  explanation  is  that  God's  Law,  given  by  revelation 
under  the  Old  Covenant,  was  designed  for  human  society 
in  the  condition  of  fallen  nature,  and  for  that  society 
in  a  certain  state  of  development.  It  was  to  be  ad- 
ministered by  men,  according  to  the  method  of  human 
law,  and  was  consequently  subject  to  the  necessary 
limitations  of  human  law,  working  in  the  same  condition. 
It  therefore  not  only  tolerated  imperfections  in  the  way 
of  leaving  them  unforbidden,  but  also  commanded  actions 
in  themselves  contrary  to  the  absolute  measure  of  right. 
Such  actions  were  relatively  good,  by  virtue  of  the 
mediate  or  temporary  end  to  which  they  were  addressed. 
Because  of  the  hardness  of  men's  hearts  divorce  and 
polygamy  were  relatively  good,  though  absolutely  evil, 
and  as  such  were  provided  for  in  the  law.  In  like 
manner  we  read  of  men  being  specially  moved  by  God 
to  actions,  such  as  the  intended  sacrifice  of  Isaac,  which 
are  absolutely  evil,  but  are  good  in  relation  to  the  con- 
dition of  the  agent  and  the  end  proximately  set  before 
him. 

These  considerations  clear  the  way  for  a  conclusion 
about  human  actions  in  general.  In  the  state  of  fallen 
nature  every  ordinary  human  action,  individual  or  social, 
is  mingled  of  good  and  evil.  It  is  good  in  so  far  as  it  is 
an  act  of  nature  ;  it  is  evil  in  so  far  as  it  is  affected  by 
the  fall  of  nature.  It  is  good  because  ultimately  moved 
by  the  will  of  the  Creator,  in  whom  alone  we  live  and 
move  and  have  our  being;  it  is  evil  because  moved  in 
part   by  the   perverted   habit   of  the  agent   or  by   his 

'  Acts  xiv.  16;  xvii.  30;  Mark  x.  5;  Heb.'  vii.  16-18  j 
Gal.  iv.  9;  Matt.  v.  17-45. 


132        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

rebellious  will.^  Every  such  action  is  absolutely  both 
good  and  evil ;  it  is  relatively  either  good  or  evil  accord- 
ing to  the  balance  of  the  forces  determining  the  agent,  or, 
in  other  words,  of  the  ends  proposed.  An  action  done 
by  constraint  is  counted  neither  good  nor  evil,  since  the 
will  has  no  part  in  it.  But  if  the  chief  determination  be 
that  of  the  will  acting  in  harmony  either  with  the  natural 
habit  and  disposition  to  do  the  will  of  the  Creator,  or 
with  a  special  indication  of  God's  will,  then  the  action  is 
counted  good,  whatever  the  admixture  of  perversity  or 
ignorance.  If  the  chief  determination  be  that  of  the  will 
acting  in  harmony  with  evil  habit  or  yielding  to  tempta- 
tion, then  the  action  is  counted  evil.  For  example,  the 
individual  act  of  taking  human  life  is  counted  good,  if 
determined  either  by  the  natural  instinct  of  self-preserva- 
tion or  by  obedience  to  law ;  it  is  counted  evil  if  other- 
wise determined.  The  law  which  commands  this  act  is 
counted  good  if  the  end  be  justice  and  the  bettering  of 
human  life ;  evil,  if  the  end  be  tyranny  or  a  callous 
avoidance  of  responsibility.  An  individual  act  of  war  is 
counted  good  if  determined  by  obedience  to  authority 
evil,  if  baser  motives  predominate.  A  national  act  of 
war  is  counted  good  if  the  end  be  justice,  and  the  means 
be  duly  proportioned  to  the  end ;  evil,  if  otherwise 
ordered. 

It  remains  to  be  said  that  every  individual  action  which 
is  rightly  to  be  counted  evil  is  actual  sin.  Sin  is  lawless- 
ness. Original  sin  is  a  condition  of  habitual  contrariety 
to  the  eternal  law  of  God.  Actual  sin  is  a  voluntary- 
action  contrary  to  the  known  law  of  God.  "Where  there 
is  no  law,  says  St.  Paul,  sin  is  not  imputed.     "  If  ye  were 

'  August.,  De  Civitate  Dei,  xix.  13  :  "  Esse  autem  natura  in  qua 
nullum  bonum  sit,  non  potest.  Proinde  nee  ipsius  diaboli  natura, 
inquantum  natura  est,  malum  est,  sed  perversitas  earn  malam  facit." 


TJie  Promise  of  Salvation  133 

blind,"  said  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  "  ye  would  have  no 
sin  :  but  now  ye  say,  We  see  :  your  sin  remaineth."  The 
light,  either  of  nature  or  of  grace,  is  granted  in  varying 
measure  to  every  man.  Every  action  done  against  the 
light  which  a  man  has,  or  may  have  if  he  will,  is  actual 
sin.^ 


Sect.  IV.: — The  Promise  of  Salvation 

St.  Thomas  Aquinas  distinguishes  the  states  of  fallen 
and  unfallen  nature  by  saying  that  while  in  both  alike 
the  help  of  grace  is  needed,  unfallen  man  requires  it  for 
one  purpose,  that  he  may  will  and  do  supernatural  good ; 
fallen  man  requires  it  for  two  purposes — first  for  the 
healing  of  his  nature,  and  secondly  that  he  may  do  super- 
natural good."  By  supernatural  good  we  mean  that  per- 
fection which  is  beyond  man's  natural  powers  considered 
in  themselves.  Man  was  indeed  created  by  God  for  this, 
and  therefore  it  is  in  a  sense  natural  to  him,  as  being  the 
perfection  of  his  nature,  but  the  attainment  of  it  is  due 
to  a  separate  gift  of  God.  The  Tree  of  Life  in  the 
original  Paradise  is  the  symbol  of  that  gift,  by  eating 
of  which  man  was  to  be  raised  to  powers  beyond  his 
nature.  Of  the  Tree  of  Life  in  the  final  Paradise  the 
leaves  are  for  the  healing  of  the  nations.'^ 

This  healing  or  salvation  was  promised  by  God  from 
the  first.     It  is  that  about  which,  says  Zacharias  in  his 

'  Rom.  V.  13  ;  John  ix.  41. 

-  Sum.  T/ieoL,  1-2.  108.  2:  "  Virtute  gratuita  superaddita  vir- 
luti  naturae  indiget  homo  in  statu  naturae  integrae  quantum  ad 
unum,  scilicet  ad  operandum  et  volendum  bonum  supernaturale ; 
sed  in  statu  naturae  corruptae  quantum  ad  duo,  scilicet  ut  sanetur,  et 
ulterius  ut  bonum  supernaturalis  virtutis  operetur." 

^  Rev.  xxii.  2. 


134        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

song,  "  he  spake  by  the  mouth  of  his  holy  prophets 
which  have  been  since  the  world  began."  In  the 
mysterious  judgment  pronounced  on  the  serpent  at  the 
Fall,  there  is  indeed  but  the  faintest  adumbration  of  what 
was  to  come  :  "  I  will  put  enmity  between  thee  and  the 
woman,  and  between  thy  seed  and  her  seed  :  it  shall 
bruise  thy  head,  and  thou  shalt  bruise  his  heel."  But 
this  crushing  of  the  serpent  implies  the  undoing  of  his 
mischief,  and  St.  Paul  uses  the  figure  to  express  the  com- 
plete renovation  of  man :  "  The  God  of  peace  shall 
bruise  Satan  under  your  feet  shortly."  ^ 

The  hope  of  salvation,  the  conviction  that  what  is  gone 
wrong  in  human  nature  will  in  some  way  be  set  right, 
appears  dimly  shadowed  in  the  beliefs  of  many  nations. 
We  cannot  however  safely  attribute  this  hope  to  any 
other  source  than  a  consciousness  of  evil  as  a  dis- 
turbance in  the  order  of  nature,  which  it  is  reason- 
able to  suppose  will  pass  away.  There  is  a  desire  for 
perfect  happiness,  and  for  the  reign  of  perfect  justice  ; 
the  desire  breeds  a  hope  ;  but,  as  Hooker  well  says,  in 
the  natural  constitution  of  man  there  is  no  possibility 
of  attaining  it,  nor  even  the  power  of  imagining  a  means 
to  its  consummation.  "  There  resteth  therefore  either  no 
way  unto  salvation,  or  if  any,  then  surely  a  way  which 
is  supernatural,  a  way  which  could  never  have  entered 
into  the  heart  of  man  as  much  as  once  to  conceive  or 
imagine,  if  God  himself  had  not  revealed  it  extraordinarily. 
For  which  cause  we  term  it  the  Mystery  or  secret  way  of 
salvation."- 

The  hope  of  salvation  rested  therefore  on  the  promise 
of  God,  obscurely  intimated  from  the  beginning,  repeated 

'   Rom.  xvi.  20. 

-'  Jiccl,  Pol.,  i.  II.  5.  See  also  the  eloquent  passage  in  §  6, 
"  Concerning  Faith,"  etc. 


The  Promise  of  Salvation  135 

with  growing  clearness  in  the  revelation  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Righteousness  and  salvation  are  the  principal 
keynotes  of  the  Psalter ;  the  righteousness  of  God,  which 
is  in  some  way  to  work  the  salvation  of  man.  Concern- 
ing this  salvation,  says  St.  Peter,  the  prophets  searched 
diligently  what  time  the  Spirit  which  was  in  them  signified. 
It  was  future  to  them.  The  Law  also  foreshadowed  the 
same,  though  men  of  little  understanding  thought  to  find 
health  and  life  in  the  precepts  of  the  Law  themselves. 
The  peculiar  privilege  of  the  children  of  the  stock  of 
Abraham  was  to  have  the  certainty  of  future  salvation 
kept  always  before  them,  and  to  look  for  it  in  the  coming 
of  one  who  should  be  of  themselves.  It  is  therefore 
called  expressly  the  hope  of  Israel.  But  equally  it  is 
called  the  desire  of  all  nations  ;  not  because  all  were 
looking  for  it  with  intelligent  expectation,  but  because  it 
was  the  attainment  of  that  health  and  life  in  which  alone 
they  could  find  satisfaction.^ 

Salvation  ,was  not  only  for  individual  men.  It  was 
promised  to  God's  people.  When  the  time  of  fulfilment 
is  come,  we  find  the  promise  extended  to  the  whole 
world.  To  say  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Saviour 
of  the  world  is  not  the  same  thing  as  to  say  that  he  is 
the  Saviour  of  men,  or  that  he  would  have  all  men  to  be 
saved.  This  might  signify  only  the  healing  of  individual 
souls.  But  the  world,  in  the  language  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, means  human  society.  This  should  be  the  most 
orderly  thing  in  creation  ;  it  is  the  most  disordered,  and 
the  healing  of  its  disorder  is  intended.'- 

'   I  Pet.  i.  II  ;    Acts  xiii.  26  ;  xxviii.  20  ;  Hagg.  ii.  7. 

2  John  iii.  17  ;  iv.  42  ;  I  John  iv.  14  ;  i  Tim.  ii.  4.  The  original 
signification  of  the  word  Kiaixos  is  not  to  be  neglected,  though  its 
use  in  the  sense  of  human  society,  first  in  the  Book  of  Wisdom 
(ii.    24 ;  vi.  26  ;    x.    i  ;    xiv.  6,    14)   and    afterwards    in    the   New 


136        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

For  this  end  the  world  was  prepared  during  long  ages 
by  the  providence  of  God.  A  pious  imagination  may 
trace  in  all  secular  history  the  course  of  this  preparation, 
which  would  seem  to  be  a  necessary  part  of  the  Divine 
government.  With  greater  confidence  we  may  recognize 
such  preparation  designed  and  effected  in  the  sacred 
history  of  God's  ancient  people,  whose  are  the  promises, 
and  of  whom  is  Christ  as  concerning  the  flesh.  The  Law, 
says  St.  Paul,  was  a  tutor  bringing  men  to  Christ.  In 
the  passage  where  he  uses  this  bold  figure  he  is  main- 
taining, with  the  help  of  a  strange  exegesis,  the  unity  of 
that  seed  of  Abraham  to  which  the  promise  was  made. 
It  was  not  made  to  the  several  individuals  naturally  born 
of  Abraham,  but  to  one,  that  is  Christ,  and  is  thereupon 
extended  to  all  who  are  as  one  man  in  Christ,  and  so 
collectively  Abraham's  seed.  The  preparation  of  the 
gospel  is  the  preparation  of  human  society  in  the  family 
of  Abraham.  Its  fulfilment  is  the  extension  of  the 
promise  of  Abraham  to  a  wider  society  which  knows  no 
limits  of  nationality.^ 

In  this  preparation  there  are  two  points  which  call 
for  attention.  The  first  is  the  grace  of  prophecy.  We 
have  seen  that  in  his  fallen  state  man  is  moved  by  God 
to  good  in  two  ways  :  in  the  way  of  nature,  by  the 
guiding  impulse  of  the  Creator  continuing  always  ;  in  the 
way  of  grace,  by  a  special  supernatural  impulse.  The  grace 
of  prophecy  is  an  impulse  of  this  kind  moving  men  to 
apprehend  truths  unattainable  by  natural  means,  and 
to  speak  them  forth  for  the  instruction  of  God's  people. 
Future  things  are  obviously  matter  for  such  apprehen- 
sion ;  to  the  popular  mind  in  all  ages  the  prophet  would 

Testament,  and  especially  in  the  Johannine  writings,  may  have  no 
conscious  connection  with  the  primarj'  idea  of  order. 
'  Rom.  ix.  4  ;  Gal.  iii.  16-29. 


The  Promise  of  Salvation  137 

appeal  most  strongly  as  the  foreteller,  and  indeed  in  the 
Law  accurate  prediction  is  spoken  of  as  a  warrant  of 
Divine  mission.  On  the  other  hand  this  very  same 
warrant  was  not  to  be  accepted  in  the  case  of  a  prophet 
stirring  up  rebellion  against  the  God  of  Israel.  In  fact, 
definite  prediction  fills  a  very  small  part  of  the  accepted 
prophetic  writings.  For  some  time  there  were  organized 
bodies  of  prophets,  while  at  an  earlier  date  they  would 
seem  to  have  been  a  professional  class.  We  read  of 
them  also  as  sharply  opposed  to  each  other,  advising 
different  parties  in  the  nation.^ 

We  are  not  then  to  suppose  the  prophets  habitually 
and  ordinarily  moved  by  Divine  grace.  They  were  the 
professed  teachers  of  religion,  and  it  was  chiefly  members 
of  their  class  who  received  the  impulse  which  we  know 
as  the  grace  of  prophecy.  It  was  not,  however,  confined 
to  them.  "  I  am  no  prophet,"  says  Amos,  "  neither  am 
I  one  of  the  sons  of  the  prophets ;  but  I  am  a  herdman 
and  a  dresser  of  sycomore  trees ;  and  the  Lord  took  me 
from  following  the  flock,  and  the  Lord  said  unto  me, 
Go,  prophesy  unto  my  people  Israel."  -  The  matter  of 
prophecy  was  usually  found  in  things  immediately  con- 
cerning those  who  were  addressed.  Predictions  were  of 
things  near  at  hand ;  counsel  was  given  for  present 
needs.  But  above  all  this,  and  permeating  all  the  words 
of  prophecy,  there  is  the  great  work  of  maintaining  and 
expanding  the  Hope  of  Israel.  There  is  perpetual 
reference  to  a  salvation  more  or  less  remote  in  a  future 
as  yet  undetermined.  We  are  taught  in  the  Gospel  to 
consider  this  the  real  meaning  of  prophecy.  Encour- 
agements and   warnings  which  referred  unquestionably 

•  Deut.  xviii.  22  :  with  which  compare  xiii.  1-5  ;  i  Sam.  ix.  6-9  ; 
I  Kings  xxii.  ;  Jer.  xxviii. 
-   Amos  vii.  14. 


138        TJie  E  lane  fits  of  Christian  Doctri?te 

to  events  of  the  present  or  of  the  near  future,  are 
taken  as  referring  also,  more  obscurely,  to  the  fulfilment 
of  God's  purpose  in  the  healing  of  mankind.  The  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  himself  used  the  writings  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  this  way  :  "  Beginning  from  Moses  and  from  all 
the  prophets,  he  interpreted  to  them  in  all  the  Scriptures 
the  things  concerning  himself."  ^ 

The  grace  of  prophecy  was  therefore  intended  to  pre- 
pare men  for  the  gospel  of  salvation  by  maintaining  in 
the  chosen  people  of  God  a  growing  sense  of  need  and 
a  living  hope  of  satisfaction.  This  was  effected  by 
means  not  of  definite  predictions  which  might  paralyse 
present  effort,  but  of  stimulating  counsels  for  the  present 
which  suggested  larger  possibilities  in  the  future.  In 
this  way  that  knowledge  of  God's  purpose  was  gradually 
unfolded  which  one  day,  it  was  predicted,  would  fill  the 
earth,  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea. 

The  other  point  in  the  preparation  that  calls  for 
attention  is  the  law  of  Sacrifice.  A  sacrifice  in  the 
broadest  sense  is  an  offering  made  to  God  in  acknow- 
ledgment of  his  supreme  dominion.  The  idea  of  such 
offering  is  common  to  the  whole  human  race ;  it  is 
elaborated  in  the  Mosaic  Law.  The  offerings  commonly 
made  are  of  two  classes.  In  the  first  class  are  the 
fruits  of  the  ground,  restricted  in  the  Mosaic  ritual  to 
corn,  wine,  and  oil.  In  the  case  of  these  offerings  the 
simple  and  fundamental  idea  is  that  of  rendering  to  God, 
in  acknowledgment  of  his  bounty,  a  part  of  that  which 
he  bestows  on  men  for  food  ;  but  there  appears  also  the 
idea  of  sharing  in  a  common  table  with  God.  The 
offering  is  partly  consumed  by  fire,  partly  eaten  by  the 
worshipper.  In  the  second  class  are  the  offerings  of 
blood,  when  a  living  animal  is  slain,  the  blood  poured 
'  Luke  xxiv.  27. 


The  Promise  of  Salvation  139 

out  before  God,  and  the  flesh  either  burnt  with  fire  or 
eaten  by  the  worshippers. 

It  is  impossible  within  our  small  compass  to  speak 
in  detail  of  the  sacrifices,  whether  of  the  heathen  world, 
of  the  patriarchs,  or  of  the  Law.  Intricate  questions  of 
exegesis  and  of  theology  are  involved.  The  general 
ideas  upon  which  all  turns  are,  however,  simple  enough. 
In  all  offerings  of  blood  there  is  contained  an  idea, 
expressed  in  Hebrew  as  covering,  which  we  denominate 
expiation  or  atonemetit.  What  is  covered  is  the  guilt  or 
shame  of  him  by  whom  or  for  whom  the  offering  is 
made.  Sin  is  in  man  hindering  him  from  access  to  God. 
To  cover  this  up  is  not  indeed  to  make  it  non-existent, 
still  less  to  hide  it  out  of  sight  in  a  pretended  non- 
existence, but  to  deprive  it  of  power  to  sunder  man 
from  God.^  By  virtue  of  this  covering,  man,  though 
alienated  from  God  by  sin,  is  able  to  approach  him  in 
worship.  The  ground  of  atonement  is  the  substitution 
of  the  victim  for  the  offerer.  Knowing  his  own  life  to 
be  forfeit  for  sin,  man  offers  to  God's  acceptance  in 
place  thereof  the  life  of  an  innocent  beast,  symbolized  by 
the  blood.  The  forfeit  is  thus  acknowledged  and  sym- 
bolically paid,  and  the  sinner  is  after  a  sort  allowed  that 
access  to  God  which  he  lost  by  sin. 

There  follows  the  disposal  of  the  flesh,  which  is  either 
wholly  burnt  upon  the  altar,  or  partly  burnt  and  partly 
consumed  in  a  sacrificial  feast.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
that  by  the  feast  is  symbolized  reconciliation  and  friend- 
ship with  God  ;  it  is  a  partaking  of  the  Lord's  Table." 
With  less  assurance  we  may  say  that  by  eating  the  flesh 

»  Kurtz,  Sacrificial  Worship,  etc.,  §  28,  p.  67,  Eng.  tr. 
2   So  also  to  partake  of  heathen  sacrifices  was,  according  to  St. 
Paul,  to  partake  of  the  table  of  demons  (l  Cor.  x.  21). 


140        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

of  the  victim  tlie  offerer  symbolized  his  own  identifica- 
tion with  the  victim,  which  was  not  merely  a  substitute, 
but  was  mystically  his  very  self.  The  flesh  burnt  upon 
the  altar  is  unquestionably  the  portion  of  God,  sym- 
bolizing the  surrender  of  self,  to  be  purified  and 
sublimated  by  the  spiritual  force  which  the  fire  re- 
presents. 

These  are  the  common  features  of  all  sacrifice.  In 
the  Mosaic  ritual  they  were  minutely  elaborated,  and 
three  forms  of  the  offering  of  blood  were  distinguished. 
In  the  sin-offering,  or  trespass-offering,  the  idea  of 
atonement  was  predominant.  In  this  the  Aaronic  priest- 
hood had  peculiar  duties  and  privileges.  The  priest, 
and  he  alone,  could  perform  a  precise  and  mysterious 
ritual  of  the  blood,  and  partake  of  the  flesh.  In  the 
whole  burnt-offering  the  idea  of  pure  worship  was  pre- 
dominant, the  whole  of  the  flesh  being  surrendered  to 
God  through  the  fire  of  the  altar.  In  the  peace-oftering, 
a  sacrifice  of  praise  and  thanksgiving,  there  was  added 
to  the  ritual  of  expiation  and  worship  the  sacred  banquet, 
in  which  the  offerer  and  his  friends  feasted  with  God  in 
token  of  reconciliation. 

"  It  is  impossible  that  the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats 
should  take  away  sins." '  The  obvious  inadequacy  of 
these  sacrifices,  which  nevertheless  were  accepted  and 
even  commanded  by  God,  showed  them  to  be  typical  of 
something  which  should  afterwards  be  revealed ;  an 
atonement  which  should  have  a  real  and  sufficient 
efficacy,  a  means  of  access  and  communion  which  should 
in  very  deed  restore  man  to  tlie  presence  of  God.  In 
this  way  the  Law  was,  by  its  very  imperfection,  a  tutor 
bringing  men    to    Christ.     But  not   the  Law  only;    all 

'  lleb.  X.  4. 


TJie  Promise  of  Salvation  141 

ethnic  religion  as  well,  by  insisting  with  whatever 
obscurity  on  the  principle  of  sacrifice,  bore  witness  to 
the  need  of  what  he  should  do,  and  prepared  the  way 
for  him  who  was  alike  the  Hope  of  Israel  and  the  Desire 
of  the  Nations. 


CHAPTER   III 

CONCERNING    REDEMPTION 

Sect.  I. — The  Incarnation 

"  The  Word  was  made  Flesh,  and  dwelt  among  us." 
We  have  already  considered  the  personality  of  the 
Eternal  Word.  This  Divine  Person,  we  are  taught, 
became  man ;  that  is  to  say,  he  took  into  the  unity  of  his 
Person  our  human  nature  in  its  completeness,  body  and 
soul.  He  did  not  take  only  a  human  body,  to  which 
his  Divine  nature  stood  in  the  relation  of  soul ;  for  a 
human  body  alone  is  not  man.  In  the  language  of 
Scripture,  the  flesh  is  the  whole  composite  humanity.  The 
word  is  used  by  St.  Paul  for  that  which  is  opposed  to  the 
spiritual  or  godly,  when  it  stands  not  for  the  body,  which 
is  equally  sacred  with  the  soul,  but  for  the  corrupt  nature 
that  we  inherit.  "  They  that  are  in  the  flesh,"  he  says, 
"  cannot  please  God."  It  is  the  "  flesh  of  sin,"  and  in 
the  likeness  of  this  flesh  God  sent  his  Son.^ 

It  is  an  obvious  truth,  and  for  that  very  reason,  perhaps, 
not  stated  in  express  terms  of  revelation,  that  by  the  act 
of  taking  this  flesh  into  union  with  himself  he  cleansed 
it  from  sin. 2     Such  is  indeed  the  purpose  of  the  Incarna- 

'   I  Cor.  vi.  13-20  ;  Rom.  viii.  3,  8, 

-  I  do  not  touch  the  question  whether  the  Flesh  which  he  took 
of  his  Mother  was  already  cleansed  in  her.  Such  cleansing  would 
only  anticipate  the  effect  of  the  Incarnation. 

142 


The  Incarnation  143 

tion.  According  to  the  bold  figure  of  St.  Athanasius, 
man  was  a  portraiture  of  God  graven  out  of  created 
matter,  but  obliterated  by  accumulations  of  filth.  For 
the  restoration  of  the  likeness,  he  who  was  the  very- 
Image  depicted,  and  for  whose  sake  the  dishonoured 
material  was  saved  from  destruction,  came  in  his  own 
Person.^  The  created  image  of  God,  as  we  have  seen, 
is  the  rational  nature  of  man ;  the  likeness  of  God  was 
the  original  righteousness  in  which  man  was  created. 
The  image,  defaced  by  the  obliteration  of  this  likeness, 
was  restored,  and  more  than  restored,  by  the  assumption 
of  manhood  into  the  Person  of  the  Eternal  Word. 
Human  nature  was  thus  endowed  with  the  unchangeable 
holiness  of  God  himself,  and  the  Divine  purpose  in 
creating  man  was  definitely  fulfilled  :  Let  us  make  man  in 
our  image,  after  our  likeness.  The  image  was  there  from 
the  first  and  was  indestructible  ;  the  likeness  was  impressed 
on  man  as  he  came  from  the  hand  of  his  Maker;  but 
notwithstanding  this,  we  have  seen  reason  to  suppose 
that  he  was  created  not  in  his  ultimate  perfection,  but  in 
the  way  to  it,  and  that  his  progress  was  turned  aside  by 
the  opposition  of  his  own  will  to  the  Divine  Will.  This 
was  remedied,  and  the  ultimate  perfection  was  attained, 
when  the  Word  was  made  flesh.  The  Incarnate  Word 
is  therefore  called,  in  his  human  nature,  the  second 
Adam,  and  that  for  two  reasons.      He  is  the  firstborn 

•  Athans.,  De  huarn.  Verbi,  c.  xiv.,  Op.,  torn.  i.  p.  66  :  'Cis 
yap  TTjs  •Ypa(pii<r7]s  eV  ^v\(j)  /xopipris  ■Kapa<paviffdeiffy)S  €K  rwv  e|aiflei/ 
pv-Ktuv,  irdXiv  XP^^^  TOVTOv  Trapayevfffdat,  ou  koI  %<ttiv  tj  fj.op(pri,  'Iva 
avaKaivkcrQrjvai  i]  (Ikwv  5wT]9fj  eV  T17  avT^  v\rj  '  Sia  70^1  t^v  iKeivov 
ypa(p)}v  Koi  avT^  t)  i/'Atj  iv  ■§  Kol  yiypaiTTai,  oi!/c  eK^dWeTai,  dAA'  eV 
avrrj  ayaTv-rrovrai  '  Kara  tovto  koI  6  iravdyios  vov  Ilarphs  Tlhs,  elKii>p 
&>v  TOv  IIoTpbs,  -rrapeyevero  iirl  tovs  Tj/xerfpcDV  rSirovs,  'iva  rhv  Kar' 
avrhv  TTfTTOirjfj.fyov  &vQpoi-KOV  avaKnivlffri. 


144        The  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

of  restored  and  perfected  humanity,  and  he  is  also  the 
origin  of  a  restored  and  perfected  race;  his  work  is  to 
bring  many  sons  to  glory, ^ 

This  work  of  cleansing  and  restoring  human  nature 
is  the  purpose  of  the  Incarnation.  We  can  speak  of 
this  purpose  only  so  far  as  our  knowledge  extends. 
Theologians  have  debated  the  question  whether,  if  man 
had  not  fallen,  the  Son  of  God  would  nevertheless  have 
become  incarnate.  It  is  a  question  of  purely  speculative 
theology.  The  answer  is  no  part  of  Christian  doctrine. 
God  does  not  reveal  to  us  what  would  have  been,  if 
things  had  been  other  than  they  are.  He  reveals  that 
which  it  concerns  us  to  know,  things  being  as  they 
are.  We  know  indeed  that  God  the  Creator  has 
an  eternal  purpose,  which  he  purposed  in  Christ  Jesus 
our  Lord ;  that  a  mystery  of  Christ,  hidden  from  all 
ages  in  God,  is  now  revealed  by  the  gathering  in 
of  men  as  fellow-members  of  his  Body,  and  fellow- 
partakers  of  the  promise  in  him.  That  is  to  say,  we 
are  forbidden  to  think  of  the  work  of  Christ  as  an  after- 
thought of  mercy  consequent  upon  the  Fall,  even  if  such 
a  conception  were  not  contradictory  to  the  Divine  attri- 
butes. But  nothing  is  revealed  as  to  the  manner  in 
which  this  work  would  have  been  done,  if  sin  had  not 
been.  Revelation  is  of  realities ;  and  the  fallen  state 
of  man  being  his  actual  state,  the  Incarnation  of  the  Son 
of  God  is  revealed  as  relative  to  that  state.  He  came  to 
seek  and  to  save  that  which  was  lost.  The  religion 
of  Jesus  Christ  appeals  to  the  heart  by  the  revelation 
of  God's  good  will  toward  us,  even  in  our  rebellion  : 
"  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten 
Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  on  him  should  not  perish, 
but  have  eternal  life."  ''■ 

'   Heb.  ii.  lO.  *  Eph.  iii.  4-1 1  ;  Luke  xix.  10 ;  John  iii.  16. 


The  Incarnation  145 

About  the  Person  of  the  Incarnate  Word  there  has 
been  long  and  shameful  controversy.  Definition  by  the 
Church  has  been  made  necessary  through  the  persistence 
of  heresies.  No  such  definition  has  ever  been  wantonly 
undertaken.  The  difificulty  of  expressing  in  human 
language  the  circumstances  of  a  fact  so  inexplicable  and 
so  incomparable  as  the  Incarnation,  is  sufficient  ground 
for  avoiding  definition  if  possible.  The  idea  of  incarna- 
tion was  not,  indeed,  unknown  to  the  ancient  world ;  it 
appears  in  more  than  one  form  of  Eastern  belief.  Here, 
as  elsewhere,  the  facts  of  the  gospel  fulfil  the  desires  of 
men.  But  the  existence  of  these  ideas  endangered  more 
than  it  helped  the  right  understanding  of  the  truth. 
False  ideas,  imported  from  divers  sources,  impaired  the 
hold  of  Christians  upon  the  faith  of  the  gospel.  The 
definitions  of  the  Church  are  nothing  else  but  the 
declaration  of  that  faith  in  a  form  adapted  to  meet 
the  false  ideas  imported. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Incarnate  Word,  regarded  his- 
torically as  developed  in  controversy,  has  been  called 
Christology.  For  our  purpose  it  will  sufifice  to  sum  up 
the  doctrine  as  guarded  by  the  definitions  of  the  Church 
against  various  forms  of  error. 

The  Body  of  Christ  is  real,  not  a  phantasm,  as  held 
by  the  Docetics,  who  seem  to  have  derived  their  idea 
from  the  pagan  theophanies,  or  appearances  of  the  gods 
in  human  form.  He  was  really  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary 
his  mother ;  he  hungered  and  thirsted  ;  he  suffered  and 
died  a  real  death. 

The  Soul  of  Christ  is  a  true  human  soul,  complete  in 
all  its  natural  powers.  The  Apollinarians  held  that 
Christ's  Body  was  informed  with  life  by  the  Divine 
Word,  in  place  of  the  rational  human  soul.  His  complete 
humanity  was  thus  denied ;  if  this  were  true,  he  was  not 

L 


146        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

made  man,  but  assumed  only  the  material  organization 
of  man.  But  we  are  expressly  taught  that  he  advanced 
in  wisdom  as  in  stature ;  that  he  is  able  to  sympathize 
with  our  weakness ;  that  he  endured  all  our  trials,  save 
only  those  which  come  from  the  existence  in  us  of  the 
sinful  habit.^ 

The  Body  of  Christ  was  therefore  formed  in  the  womb 
of  his  Mother,  though  without  the  impregnation  of  human 
seed,  yet  otherwise  naturally,  being  compacted  of  her 
blood;  was  born,  though,  it  is  piously  believed,  without 
injury  to  her  virginity,  yet  otherwise  naturally ;  was 
nourished  in  the  ordinary  course  of  nature,  suffered  and 
died  by  the  common  death  of  all  men.  This  Body  was 
animated  by  a  true  human  Soul,  created  as  other  souls 
are  created,  but  untouched  by  the  taint  of  original  sin. 
This  Soul  was  fully  equipped  with  all  natural  powers 
and  capacities  of  understanding  and  will,  with  all  the 
supernatural  endowments  bestowed  upon  original  man, 
and  further  with  other  supernatural  endowments,  on 
which  little  light  is  thrown  by  revelation,  consequent 
upon  the  personal  union  of  the  manhood  with  the  Divine 
Nature. 

Nevertheless  he,  whose  Soul  and  Body  these  were,  was 
none  other  than  the  Divine  Person,  the  Eternal  Son  of 
God.  Many  attempts  have  been  made  to  avoid  this 
truth.  Apart  from  the  heresy  of  Arius,  who  made  the 
Word  himself  a  creature,  the  root  of  all  these  attempts 
will  be  found  in  the  teaching  attributed  to  Theodore  of 
Mopsuestia,  that  a  man  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  miraculously 
born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  was  by  a  supreme  and  unique 
operation  of  Divine  grace  united  to  the  Eternal  Son.  In 
the  form  of  Nestorianism  this  became  the  assertion  of 
two  distinct  hypostases  or  personalities.  The  Divine 
'  Luke  ii.  52  ;  Ileb.  iv.  15. 


The  Incarnation  147 

Person  of  the  Son  and  a  human  person  were  supposed  to 
be  jomed  together  in  a  way  passing  understanding.  It 
was  a  minor  question  at  what  point  of  time  the  union 
took  place,  whether  immediately  upon  the  conception  of 
the  human  person,  or,  as  some  held,  when  he  was  grown 
to  man's  estate,  and  specifically  at  the  baptism  in  Jordan. 
An  error  near  akin  to  this,  but  complicated  with  denial 
of  the  Trinity  of  Persons,  was  that  of  the  Polish 
Unitarians  in  the  seventeenth  century,  who  held  that  the 
man  Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  by  reason  of  his  perfect 
obedience  made  partaker  of  the  Divine  attributes,  and 
therefore  was  to  be  worshipped  as  God.^ 

The  Church  met  these  subtleties  by  the  plain  declara- 
tion that  he  who  was  born  of  Mary  was  God.  The 
Council  of  Ephesus  closed  the  way  to  evasion  by 
attributing  to  Mary  the  title  of  Theotokos,  God-bearer. 
One  only  indivisible  Person  was  God  from  the  beginning, 
was  made  man,  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  died,  and 
rose  again,  and  lives  for  ever  more,  both  God  and 
Man.2 

In  the  unity  of  this  one  Person  are  the  two  complete 
and  perfect  Natures,  Divine  and  Human.  The  Godhead 
is  not  converted  into  flesh ;  humanity  is  not  deified. 
This  truth,  surpassing  our  understanding  equally  with 
that  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  is  known  as  the  doctrine  of  the 
Hypostatic  Union.      It  was  defined  at  the  Council   of 

'  Racovian  Catechism,  p.  io6,  ed.  1659  :  "  Qui  etiam  Dei  litulo 
iure  appellandus  ;  "  p.  136  :  "  Eum  necesse  est  et  potestate  atque 
imperio,  virtute  seu  potentia  et  sapientia  et,  ut  alia  nunc  mittam, 
honore  et  cultu  Deo  esse  similem." 

-  The  Latin  and  English  expressions,  Mater  Da,  AlotJur  of  God, 
are  too  well  established  in  use  to  be  excluded,  but  they  are  not 
satisfactory  renderings  of  ®iOT6Kos.  Dei  Genitrix,  suggesting  origin, 
is  even  less  happy.     Deipara  is  the  exact  equivalent. 


148        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Chalcedon,  to  meet  the  heresy  of  Monophysitism,  which 
makes  of  the  Incarnate  Word  neither  true  and  perfect 
God  nor  true  and  perfect  Man,  but  a  new  nature  com- 
pounded of  the  two. 

Each  of  the  two  Natures,  being  perfect  and  entire,  has 
its  own  proper  operation.  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the 
Incarnate  Word,  acts  truly  as  God,  and  also  acts  truly  as 
Man.  He  has  therefore  both  Divine  knowledge  and 
human  knowledge,  distinct  and  without  confusion.  He 
has  also  his  Divine  will  and  his  human  will,  equally 
distinct.  The  importance  of  this  truth  we  shall  see  when 
we  come  to  speak  of  his  human  life.  The  truth  of  the 
double  operation  was  secured  by  the  Church  in  long  and 
acrimonious  controversy  with  the  Monothelites. 

In  all  this  labour  of  definition  the  Church  has  added 
nothing  to  the  truths  revealed  in  the  gospel.  The  one 
purpose  of  it  all  has  been  to  guard  the  simple  truth  of  the 
Incarnation,  that  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  true  God  and 
true  Man,  against  the  subtleties  of  error  which  would 
impair  the  truth  either  of  his  Godhead  or  of  his  Manhood. 
The  Church  does  not  pretend  to  explain  the  mystery. 
The  terms  used  in  definition  do  not  make  it  easier  to 
believe  or  to  understand.  They  do  not  even  express  the 
truth  more  clearly  than  it  is  stated  in  the  gospel,  for 
that  is  impossible.  They  only  guard  against  a  perverse 
misreading  of  the  gospel,  or  exclude  attempted  ex- 
planations of  the  mystery  which  in  trying  to  simplify  it 
empty  it  of  meaning. 

One  further  point  must  be  touched.  Everything 
which  is  said  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  said,  in 
the  rigour  of  speech,  either  of  his  Divine  Nature  or 
of  his  Human  Nature.  When  we  say  that  he  was 
born,  that  he  hungered,  that  he  died,  we  are  clearly 
speaking  of  his  Human  Nature,  his  human  operation. 


The  Incarnation  149 

When  he  said,  "  Before  Abraham  was,  I  am,"  he  was 
speaking  in  respect  of  his  Divine  Nature.  But  so  com- 
plete is  the  unity  of  his  Person,  that  ahke  in  Scripture 
and  elsewhere  the  distinction  is  not  always  observed. 
He  who  is  God  was  born,  hungered,  and  died.  He  who 
is  Man  had  seen  Abraham.  Therefore  the  same  thing 
may  be  asserted  alike  of  God,  who  is  also  Man,  or  of 
Man  who  is  also  God.  While  yet  on  earth,  he  spoke  of 
himself  as  "  the  Son  of  Man  which  is  in  heaven."  St. 
Paul  could  say  that  God  had  purchased  to  himself  a 
Church  "  with  his  own  Blood,"  and  to  speak  thus  of  the 
Blood  of  God  became  the  common  use  of  the  Church. 
In  exactly  the  same  way  is  the  word  Thcotokos  used.  This 
mode  of  speech  is  technically  termed  by  theologians 
comumnicatio  idiomatum^  the  interchange  of  properties.^ 

The  Word  was  made  Flesh  of  the  seed  of  Abraham. 
He  came,  that  is  to  say,  not  as  if  by  chance,  but  in  ful- 
filment of  the  Divine  promise.  In  a  well-known  passage 
St.  Paul  insists  that  the  seed  of  Abraham,  to  whom  the 
promises  were  made,  is  in  the  first  place  Christ  himself, 
and  signifies  only  in  a  secondary  sense  the  line  of  descent 
and  the  nation  of  Israel  through  whom  it  ran.  In  like 
manner  he  is  unquestionably  the  seed  of  the  woman  who 
should  bruise  the  serpent's  head.  His  genealogy  is  for 
this  reason  traced,  by  St.  Luke  from  Adam,  by  St. 
Matthew  from  Abraham.  The  new  dispensation  of  God 
which  he  introduced  was  not  a  violent  supersession  of 
the  old,  but  an  orderly  development.  He  came  not  to 
destroy  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  but  to  fulfil.     The 

'  In  Greek,  avT'i^oais.  John  viii.  58  ;  iii.  13  ;  Acts  xx.  28,  where 
the  alternative  reading  Kupi'ov,  removing  a  startling  turn  of  speech, 
is  so  obvious  a  substitute  that  the  canon  of  the  more  difficult  reading 
effectually  disposes  of  it.  St.  Ignatius  has  eV  aiaari  Qeov,  Ad Ephes.  i. ; 
and  Wetstein,  ad  loc. ,  cites  many  others  who  use  the  phrase. 


ISO        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

work  of  Redemption  is  thus  shown  to  be  continuous 
with  the  work  of  Creation.  The  one  Eternal  Word  by 
whom  the  worlds  were  made  is  he  who  came  in  the  ful- 
ness of  time  to  restore  and  complete  his  own  work. 
Nothing  was  set  aside  as  failure ;  nothing  was  abrogated, 
save  that  which  was  only  preparatory  to  his  coming. 
"  For  how  many  soever  be  the  promises  of  God,  in  him 
is  the  yea ;  wherefore  also  through  him  is  the  Amen, 
unto  the  glory  of  God  through  us.^ 

More  particularly  he  was  born  of  the  lineage  of  David  ; 
and  the  genealogy  of  St.  Matthew,  as  compared  with  that 
given  by  St.  Luke,  seems  to  show  that,  whether  by  some 
law  of  adoption  or  otherwise,  he  was  the  lawful  heir  of 
David's  house.  The  construction  of  the  genealogy  is 
not  clear,  but  the  meaning  can  hardly  be  doubted.  He 
was  shown  to  be  the  Messiah,  the  Anointed  of  the  Lord 
in  regular  descent,  who  should  receive  the  kingdom  of 
his  father  David.  The  manner  of  the  kingdom  was  not 
according  to  the  expectation  of  men  ;  but  it  grew  naturally 
out  of  the  older  form  according  to  the  purpose  of  God. ' 
Human  kingship  and  human  law,  like  all  that  is  good 
in  human  life,  are  a  shadowed  image  of  the  Divine ;  the 
Son  of  God  came  as  Messiah,  not  to  supersede  them, 
but  to  perfect  them  by  personal  union  with  the  Divine 
Nature. 

He  took  Flesh  of  the  substance  of  the  Virgin  Mary  his 
Mother.  For  what  cause  it  was  the  will  of  God  that  he 
should  be  born  of  a  pure  Virgin,  without  impregnation 
by  the  seed  of  man,  theologians  may  inquire  with 
reverence.  Christian  doctrine  is  concerned  only  with 
the  fact.  By  the  visitation  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  by  the 
overshadowing  of  the  power  of  the  Most  High,  Mary 
was  enabled  to  give  life  and  form  in  her  womb  to  the 
'  Gal.  iii.  i6  ;  Gen.  iii.  15  ;  Matt.  v.  17  ;  2  Cor.  i.  20. 


The  I Jicar nation  1 5 1 

flesh  which  the  Son  of  God  took  of  her  substance.  He 
was  not  only  conceived,  he  was  also  born  of  the  Virgin 
Mary,  as  the  Church  confesses  in  the  Creed ;  her 
virginity  remaining  constant  with  maternity.  The  Virgin- 
birth  was  not  essential,  in  the  nature  of  things,  to  the 
incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God.  Other  modes  of  taking 
flesh  were  open  to  the  omnipotence  and  sanctifying  grace 
of  God.  But  this  mode  was  seemly.  The  truth  of  the 
Incarnation,  and  all  that  flows  therefrom,  does  not  rest 
upon  the  Virgin-birth,  which  for  that  reason,  perhaps,  is 
little  insisted  upon  by  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament. 
It  is  in  fact  barely  mentioned.  But  for  us  the  fact  is 
important  as  emphasizing  the  solitary  dignity,  even  in 
his  human  nature,  of  the  Incarnate  Word.  It  does  not 
injure  the  truth  of  his  manhood.  In  all  other  respects, 
save  the  virginity  of  the  Mother,  the  process  was  normal. 
The  child  grew  in  her  womb,  nourished  by  her  blood, 
and  was  born  in  due  course,  a  Babe  like  any  other. 
Here  also  we  note  the  persistence  of  order.  The  course 
of  nature  was  varied  as  little  as  might  be.  The  Incarnate 
Word  was  truly  and  naturally  the  Son  of  Man,  born  of 
a  woman. ^ 

The  Babe  thus  born  lived  a  normal  human  life, 
advancing  in  wisdom  and  in  stature.  "  For  both  he 
that  sanctifieth  and  they  that  are  sanctified  are  all  of  one  : 
for  which  cause  he  is  not  ashamed  to  call  them  brethren." 
This  was  necessary  for  the  completion  of  his  work.     "  It 

'  Gal.  iv.  4.  It  is  perhaps  significant  that  the  phrase  born  of 
wotjian  is  used  to  signify  man  in  his  natural  condition,  Matt.  xi.  ii  ; 
Job  xiv.  I,  and  elsewhere.  See  St.  Thomas  Aq.,  Sitin.  Thcol., 
3-  33-  4  :  "Si  enini  consideremus  id  quod  est  ex  parte  materiae 
conceptus,  quam  mater  ministravit,  totum  est  naturale.  Si  vero 
consideremus  id  quod  est  ex  parte  virtutis  activae,  totum  est 
miraculosum." 


152        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

behoved  him  in  all  things  to  be  made  like  unto  his 
brethren.  .  .  .  For  in  that  he  himself  hath  suffered  being 
tempted,  he  is  able  to  succour  them  that  are  tempted." 
Though  welcomed  at  the  first  by  solemn  portents,  his  life 
was  not  such  as  to  attract  extraordinary  attention.  His 
Mother  alone  would  seem  to  have  stored  in  her  memory 
the  events  of  the  sacred  infancy,  and  those  among  whom 
he  had  grown  up  to  manhood  were  of  all  men  the  most 
amazed  at  the  revelation  of  power  attending  his  public 
ministry.^ 

We  touch  a  difficult  question  that  cannot  be  set  aside 
as  merely  one  of  speculative  theology.  St.  Paul  says 
that  Jesus  Christ,  "  being  in  the  form  of  God,  counted 
it  not  a  prize  to  be  on  an  equality  with  God,  but  emptied 
himself,  taking  the  form  of  a  servant.^  This  emptying 
has  exercised  many  minds,  more  especially  of  late  years. 
The  personal  union  of  the  Divine  Word  and  the  perfect 
manhood  involves  a  relation  between  the  two  Natures 
which  is  to  us  inexplicable.  We  know  only  what  is 
revealed.  Inferences  cannot  be  drawn  from  what  is 
known  without  grave  peril  of  mistakes ;  they  should  be 
made,  if  at  all,  with  the  greatest  reverence  and  reserve. 
The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  personally,  as  the  Divine  Word, 
has  the  inalienable  possession  of  the  Divine  glory,  power, 
knowledge,  and  blessedness.  But  personally  also  he  took 
human  flesh  to  be  the  instrument  by  which  he  should  do 
a  certain  work.  The  emptying  of  which  St.  Paul  speaks 
might  mean  nothing  more  than  this  condescension.  But 
the  word  seems  a  very  strong  one  if  used  to  express  no 
more.     It  may  refer  to  the  manner  in  which  he  made 

•  Luke  ii.  51,  52  ;  Mark  vi.  3,  and  parallel  passages  ;  Heb.  ii. 
II,  18.  St.  Athanasius  {Contr.  Apollin.,  torn.  i.  p.  617)  shows 
that  e'l  kvbs  must  signify  common  origin  from  Adam. 

■"  Phil.  ii.  6. 


The  Incarnation  153 

himself  known  to  men,  veiling  the  glory  of  his  Godhead, 
not  merely  in  the  form  of  a  creature,  but  in  the  lowliest 
guise  of  human  life.  The  meaning  may  reach  beyond 
this  into  regions  of  thought  impenetrable  to  us.  The 
only  interpretation  which  must  be  rejected  is  any  which 
implies  a  change  in  the  Divine  attributes. 

Again,  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  speaks  of  himself  in  the 
Gospel  as  ignorant  of  something  in  the  future.  "  Of 
that  day  or  that  hour  knoweth  no  one,  not  even  the 
angels  in  heaven,  neither  the  Son,  but  the  Father."  ^  He 
seems  to  attribute  this  ignorance  to  himself  personally, 
as  the  Eternal  Son.  This  we  can  only  account  for 
as  an  example  of  that  communicatio  idioviahim  of 
which  we  have  spoken  above.  In  saying  that  he  knew 
it  not,  he  must  have  been  speaking  in  respect  of  his 
Human  Nature.  He  could  not  be  ignorant  as  God. 
But  how  could  he  personally  both  know  and  not  know  ? 
It  is  the  standing  question  of  the  two  operations  in  the 
one  Person. 

A  limitation  of  knowledge  in  his  human  Soul  is  clearly 
indicated ;  nor  is  this  any  more  than  is  involved  in  his 
advancement  in  wisdom.  But  on  the  other  hand  he  came 
to  reveal  the  truth  of  God,  and  this  by  the  word  of  his 
mouth.  If  in  his  Human  Nature  he  was  of  limited  know- 
ledge, how  could  he  do  this  ?  A  superhuman  knowledge 
is  in  many  places  of  the  Gospel  attributed  to  him,  and 
that  not  by  inspiration  as  in  the  case  of  the  prophets.  It 
is  emphatically  said  that  he  knew  things  ///  himself  \\\\\^ 
were  apart  from  the  knowledge  of  sense.  Not  otherwise 
can  he  be  accepted  as  the  sure  and  final  Teacher  of  the 

'  Mark  xiii.  32.  I  dismiss,  with  Liddon  [Bampioji  Lectmrs, 
p.  459,  8th  ed.),  as  unsatisfactory  the  patristic  interpretations  of  the 
ignorance  as  economic,  meaning  only  that  this  was  knowledge  which 
the  Incarnate  Son  was  not  to  reveal. 


154        TJie  Elements  of  Christia7i  Doctrine 

hidden  things  of  God.  The  purpose  of  his  coming  in 
the  flesli  could  not  be  fulfilled  without  such  knowledge. 
His  Soul  was  therefore  illumined  by  personal  union  with 
the  Word.  It  is  not  only  that  he,  though  Man,  knew  all 
things,  in  the  sense  in  which  he,  though  God,  suffered 
and  died.  He  knew  things,  as  Man,  in  his  human  Soul, 
which  are  beyond  the  compass  of  human  knowledge. 
Theologians  call  this  the  infused  knowledge  of  Jesus 
Christ.  In  addition,  he  had  the  ordinary  acquired  know- 
ledge common  to  all  men. 

His  knowledge  we  have  seen  to  be  limited.  This  is 
allowed  on  all  hands  of  his  acquired  knowledge.  He 
lived,  in  this  respect,  the  true  human  life  of  his  time  and 
country.  But  in  regard  to  his  infused  knowledge,  there 
has  not  been  perfect  agreement  among  orthodox 
Christians.  Some,  and  more  particularly  Western 
theologians,  have  held  that  from  the  moment  of  con- 
ception the  Soul  of  Jesus  was  filled  with  all  knowledge. 
It  is  not  impossible,  though  there  are  passages  in  the 
Gospel  hard  to  reconcile  with  such  a  supposition.  It 
seems  safer  to  say,  with  the  greatest  of  the  Eastern 
Fathers,  that  as  he  assumed  the  human  weakness  of 
hunger  and  thirst,  so  also  he  clothed  himself  in  the  proper 
weakness  of  human  ignorance.^  If  it  be  asked  what  was 
the  extent  of  his  infused  knowledge,  it  may  safely  be 
answered  that,  as  Man,  he  knew  all  things  which  it  was 
necessary  for  him,  as  Man,  to  teach  men.  We  are  not 
bound  to  limit  such  knowledge  to  that  which  he  actually 

'  Athanas.,  Cofttra  Avian.  Orat.  iv.,  torn.  i.  p.  496  :  Tajr  avOpdirav 
tffTiv  tSiov  rh  ayvoeTv,  /col  (rdpKa  ayvoovtrav  eveSvaaTo.  And  again, 
p.  497  :  "Clffirep  yap  ^vOpunros  yevo/j-evos  fitTO,  ayOptiiroJV  ireiva  Kal 
Si\pa  Kal  Traerxet,  ovroos  /nera  fxev  avOpanraiv  iis  &vdpwiTos  ovK  olSe, 
dt'iKws  Se  &C  iv  rcf  irarpX  ojs  A070S  Koi  'S,o<pia  ol5e  '  Kal  oCSev  icmv  o 
ayvou. 


The  Licarnation  155 

taught,  but  in  passing  beyond  this  we  enter  the  region  of 
speculation.  Apart  from  his  teaching  we  have  Uttle 
evidence  of  what  was  in  the  mind  of  Christ ;  his  infused 
knowledge  may  have  extended  beyond  our  imagining, 
but  the  truth  of  the  Incarnation  does  not  require  us  to 
attribute  to  his  human  Soul  the  knowledge  of  anything 
which  did  not  concern  his  mission  as  Incarnate.  As  the 
Eternal  Word  he  could  not  fail  to  know  all  things ;  as 
the  Word  Incarnate,  according  to  the  truth  of  his  Man- 
hood, he  could  be  ignorant  of  some  things.  Such  is  the 
twofold  operation  of  knowledge  in  the  Incarnate  Word. 

The  twofold  operation  of  will  is  even  more  important, 
though  less  debated.  There  is  the  same  inexplicable 
difficulty.  As  the  one  Person  could  know  and  not  know, 
so  the  one  Person  could  will  and  not  will.  There  is 
however  a  subtle  difference  between  the  two  cases.  Not 
to  know  what  God  knows  implies  no  defect  in  a  human 
soul,  for  human  knowledge  is  naturally  and  essentially 
finite;  but  not  to  will  what  God  wills  would  be  moral 
failure.  Knowledge  and  ignorance  might  coexist  in  the 
Person  of  Christ ;  was  it  possible  for  him  at  once  to  will 
and  not  to  will  ?  Could  he  in  his  Divine  Nature  will 
one  thing,  and  in  his  Human  Nature  will  othenvise  ?  A 
conflict  of  the  two  wills  would  mean  resistance  of  the 
human  will  to  the  Divine ;  and  this  would  be  sin.  Can 
we  speak  of  the  Incarnate  Word  as  liable  to  sin?  The 
answer  is  that  sin  was  for  him  a  moral  impossibility.  We 
do  not  attribute  to  his  Human  Nature  a  natural  incapacity 
for  sin,  which  would  be  the  denial  of  free  will  and  so  of 
his  perfect  humanity,  but  a  boundless  capacity  for  avoid- 
ing sin.  A  real  effort  was  required  to  hold  his  human 
will  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  Divine  Will,  but  the 
effort  was  never  lacking,  and  there  never  was  any  doubt 
as  to   the   issue.      The   supreme    effort    is  recorded   in 


156        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

what  we  read  of  the  Agony  in  Gethsemane,  where  the 
human  will,  naturally  recoiling  from  the  prospect  of 
the  Cross,  and  expressed  in  broken  utterance  of  prayer, 
was  brought  into  subjection  with  sweat  of  blood.  The 
meaning  of  the  Lord's  temptation  is  nothing  else  but 
this.  He  strenuously  put  aside  suggestions  made  to  his 
human  will  which  involved  a  conflict  wuth  the  Divine 
Will.  It  is  obvious  that,  for  these  temptations  to  be 
real,  they  must  have  been  fitted  to  appeal  to  his 
nature  in  its  sinlessness.  Appeals  to  unworthy  motives 
or  depraved  desires  would  not  have  touched  him.  He 
was  tempted  as  we  are,  with  the  one  exception  of  tempta- 
tions based  on  the  sin  that  is  within  us.^ 

The  human  life  of  the  Incarnate  Word  was  thus  a 
continuous  and  successful  effort  after  submission  to  the 
Will  of  God.  "  My  meat,"  he  said,  "  is  to  do  the  will  of 
him  that  sent  me,  and  to  accomplish  his  work."  -  His 
Human  Nature  being  taken  sinless  by  the  Word,  there 
was  perfectly  restored  in  him  the  freedom  of  the  will. 
In  this  respect  also  he  was  the  second  Adam  ;  and  he 
succeeded,  where  man  had  originally  failed,  in  freely 
adhering  to  the  Will  of  God.  Such  was  the  immediate 
effect  of  the  Incarnation.  In  the  Person  of  Christ  Man 
was  restored  to  the  perfection  of  nature,  and  super- 
naturally  exalted  according  to  the  eternal  jnirpose  of  the 
Creator. 

Sect.  II. — The  Atonement 

The  Christian  use  of  the  word  Atonement  or  Recon- 
ciliation begins  with  St.  Paul.     In  five  places  he  speaks 
of  the  reconciliation  of  the  world,  or  of  men,  to  God.     In 
one  of  these  places  he  indicates  the  means  by  which  this 
'  lleb.  iv.  15.  -  John  iv.  34. 


The  Atonemmt  157 

reconciliation  is  effected  :  "  Ye  that  once  were  far  oft'  are 
made  nigh  in  the  Blood  of  Christ."  ^  This  expression 
directs  our  attention  to  the  many  passages  in  which  we 
read  of  expiation,  or  the  cleansing  of  sin  by  the  sacred 
Blood  :  to  the  words  of  St.  John  Baptist  announcing  the 
Lord  Jesus  as  the  Lamb  of  God,  which  taketh  away  the 
sin  of  the  world ;  to  the  mystery  of  the  Lamb  that  was 
slain,  in  the  Revelation  of  St.  John  ;  and  above  all  to  the 
argument  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  which  reveals 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  our  High  Priest,  offering  him- 
self for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world,  and  through  his  own 
Blood  entering  into  the  Holy  Place,  having  obtained 
eternal  redemption. 

Gathering  this  whole  revelation  into  one  head  of  doc- 
trine, we  understand  by  the  Atonement  the  work  of  the 
Incarnate  Son,  cleansing  us  from  the  stain  of  sin,  and 
redeeming  or  delivering  us  from  the  power  of  sin,  so  that 
we  may  return  to  that  relation  towards  God  for  which  we 
were  created — the  relation  of  trusting  and  trusted  children 
towards  their  Father.  And  this  we  understand  to  be 
effected  by  his  offering  of  himself,  a  sacrifice  for  sin. 

To  understand  the  meaning  of  sacrifice,  so  far  as  it  can 
be  understood,  we  must  go  to  the  Old  Testament.  It 
is  developed  in  the  New  Testament,  but  on  the  principles 
taught  in  the  Old.  The  writers  of  the  New  Testament, 
when  they  speak  of  sacrifice,  assume  a  knowledge  of  the 
teaching  and  practice  of  the  Law.  The  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  on  one  great  occasion,  as  we  shall  see,  spoke 
words   that   are   unintelligible  without    this    knowledge. 

'  Rom.  V.  10,  II  ;  xi.  15;  2  Cor.  v.  18-20;  Eph.  ii.  13-18; 
Col.  i.  20-22.  The  word  KaTaWayr)  and  the  corresponding  verb 
KaToWacrcreti',  or  intensively  airoKaTaWaff<retv,  occur  nowhere  else 
in  the  New  Testament,  except  in  i  Cor.  vii.  11,  where  KOToAAdo-ireij/ 
is  used  of  the  reconciliation  of  a  wife  to  her  husband. 


158        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

We  have  briefly  considered  the  practice  of  the  Old 
Testament  and  the  significance  of  the  sacrifices  there 
recorded.^  We  have  now  to  consider  their  fulfihiient  in 
Jesus  Christ,  his  priesthood  and  his  offering. 

He  is  a  Priest  for  ever,  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek. 
This  designation  is  used  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  to 
distinguish  the  Christian  priesthood  from  the  Levitical  in 
two  respects.  It  points  on  the  one  hand  to  an  older  and 
wider  order  than  that  of  Aaron.  The  Levitical  priest- 
hood was  peculiar  to  the  nation  of  Israel.  Melchizedek 
was  the  high  priest  of  a  religion  which  was  not  confined 
even  to  the  family  of  Abraham,  but  to  which  Abraham 
was  subject.  It  was  the  religion  of  the  Most  High,  the 
Creator  and  the  Father  of  all  men.  In  the  second  place, 
while  the  Levitical  priesthood  was  inherited  by  descent, 
INIelchizedek,  standing  alone,  a  mysterious  figure  whose 
origin  is  left  unmarked  by  genealogy,  represents  a  priest 
appointed  directly  by  the  act  of  God.  Such  is  the  priest- 
hood of  Christ,  superseding  that  of  Aaron  by  a  return  to 
an  older  and  wider  order  of  Divine  appointment,  as  fore- 
shadowed in  the  Book  of  Psalms.- 

But  Christ,  appointed  Priest  for  ever,  superseded  the 
priesthood  of  Aaron  only  by  way  of  fulfilment.  The 
Levitical  priesthood  was  a  true  forecast  of  the  Christian 
priesthood.  There  is  no  breach  of  continuity.  "We 
see  this  the  more  clearly  if  we  consider  the  origin  of 
the  Levitical  institutions.  They  were  not  wholly  new. 
They  were  a  continuation  of  the  old  order  under 
special  conditions.  The  meaning  of  the  sacrifices 
which  had  been  offered  from  the  beginning  was 
made  clearer  by  the  distinction  of  the  sin-offering,  the 
whole  burnt-offering,  and  the  peace-offering.  But  all 
these  were  implicitly  contained  in  the  simpler  patriarchal 
'  Above,  pp.  138-140.  -  Heb.  vii.  ;  Ps.  ex. 


TJie  Atonement  159 

offerings.  For  the  sin-oftering  a  special  ritual  was 
ordered,  in  which  were  involved  the  peculiar  functions 
of  the  sons  of  Aaron  ;  once  a  year  were  offered  the 
sacrifices  of  the  Day  of  Atonement,  in  the  ritual  of  which 
was  found  the  proper  function  of  the  high  priest,  the 
representative  of  Aaron  himself;  but  all  this  ritual  of  the 
sin-offering  was  a  true  development  of  the  patriarchal  law 
which  forbad  the  eating  of  blood.  The  rule  confining 
sacrificial  worship  to  the  one  sanctuary  served  by  the 
Levitical  priesthood  w'as  designed  as  a  temporary  measure 
to  maintain  religious  unity,  nor  did  it,  until  the  last  days 
of  the  kingdom,  put  an  end  to  the  wider  practice.  The 
history  of  Elijah  sufficiently  illustrates  this.^ 

In  the  Levitical  institutions  there  was  thus  a  narrowing 
and  particularizing  of  sacrifice  and  priesthood.  In  Christ 
there  is  a  return  to  the  larger  order  of  Melchizedek,  but 
not  to  primitive  vagueness.  The  lessons  of  the  Levitical 
order  are  not  dropped.  The  argument  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  shows  how  exactly  the  significance  of  the 
special  function  of  Aaron  is  carried  to  fulfilment  in  the 
one  Sacrifice  of  the  New  Testament.  The  ritual  of  the 
blood,  with  the  entry  of  the  high  priest  into  the  second 
tabernacle  on  the  Day  of  Atonement,  is  there  treated  as 
typical  of  the  ascension  of  Christ  into  heaven  by  the 
power  of  his  own  Blood.  But  whereas  the  Levitical  high 
priest  repeated  this  ritual  year  by  year,  the  expiation  or 
redemption  being  continually  renewed,  we  see  it  fulfilled 
in  Jesus  Christ  once  and  for  all.  He  has  obtained  an 
eternal  redemption." 

We  must  not  however  regard  the  Lord's  death  as  an 
isolated  event  working  the  Atonement.     It  was  because 

'  Acts  vii.   42-50:    cp.   Deut.  iv.    19;    xvi.  3,    11,    etc.  ;    Josh. 
xxii.  9-29  ;    I  Kings  xviii.  23,  seqq. ;  Jer.  vii.    12-14  ;  xix.  12,  13. 
'  Heb.  ix.  1-14. 


i6o        The  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

he  was  "  holy,  guileless,  undefiled,  separated  from  sinners, 
and  made  higher  than  the  heavens,"  that  he  was  able  to 
consummate  redemption  by  one  offering.  He  was  per- 
fected, or  consecrated  to  his  priesthood,  through  suffer- 
ings. His  life  of  humiliation  was  a  coherent  part  of  his 
offering  ;  he  was  heard  for  his  godly  fear  ;  his  Body  was 
prepared  for  this.  Without  the  obedience  of  the  Incar- 
nation there  could  be  no  Atonement.  The  two  are 
emphatically  conjoined  by  St.  Paul  :  "  Being  found  in 
fashion  as  a  man,  he  humbled  himself,  becoming  obedient 
even  unto  death,  yea,  the  death  of  the  cross."  ^ 

The  Birth,  the  Life,  the  Death  of  Jesus  Christ  are  to  be 
regarded  as  one  act  of  self-oblation  ;  the  outpouring  of 
the  sacred  Blood  upon  the  Cross  was  the  visible  con- 
summation of  the  offering.  But  equally  his  Resurrection 
was  necessary.  He  was  raised,  says  St.  Paul  expressly, 
for  our  justification."  The  acceptance  of  the  offering,  as 
doing  away  the  effect  of  sin,  was  declared  by  his  triumph 
over  death.  And  finally  in  the  Ascension,  bringing  the 
Blood  of  the  Sacrifice,  he  brought  also  the  redeemed 
humanity  which  it  represents  into  the  presence  of  God, 
and  so  completed  the  reconciliation.  The  whole  of  the 
gospel  therefore  is  the  revelation  of  the  Atonement. 

On  the  completeness  of  the  one  offering  there  follows 
an  important  development  of  the  Sacrifice.  Under  the 
Old  Testament  the  blood  of  no  sacrifice  might  be  eaten, 
nor  might  the  flesh  of  a  sin-offering  be  eaten  by  him  who 
offered.  Of  those  brought  by  individual  offenders,  a 
part  was  burnt  on  the  altar,  the  rest  of  the  flesh  was 
eaten  by  the  priests  with  peculiar  solemnity ;  of  those 
offered  for  the  whole  nation,  or  by  the  priest  on  his  own 
behalf,   the  flesh   was   wholly  consumed    by  fire.     The 

'    Ileb.  vii.  26  ;   ii.  lO ;  v.  7-10;  x.  5  ;  Phil.  ii.  8. 
-'  Rom.  iv.  25. 


TJie  Atonement  i6i 

sin-offering  was  thus  carefully  distinguished  from  the 
peace-ofFering,  so  as  to  indicate  the  inadequacy  of  the 
expiation  or  atonement  effected.  "  It  is  impossible  that 
the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats  should  take  away  sins."  ^  But 
the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  spoke  of  eating  his  Flesh  and 
drinking  his  Blood.  He  spoke  of  this  first,  as  recorded 
in  the  sixth  chapter  of  St.  John,  in  general  terms.  But 
he  spoke  of  it  a  second  time  with  special  reference  to 
sacrifice.  In  the  night  before  he  suffered,  after  eating 
the  Passover  with  his  disciples,  he  took  bread,  blessed 
and  gave  it  to  them,  saying,  "  Take,  eat ;  this  is  my  Body, 
which  is  being  given  for  you ;  "  the  cup  also  of  wine, 
saying,  "  Drink  ye  all  of  it ;  for  this  is  my  Blood  of  the 
Covenant,  which  is  being  shed  for  many  unto  remission 
of  sins."  He  added  the  command,  "  Do  this  in  remem- 
brance of  me."  ^ 

This  language  can  be  understood  only  by  reference  to 
the  Old  Testament.  A  comparison  wdth  the  Law  shows 
it  to  be  essentially  sacrificial.  It  is  not  this  or  that 
term  only,  but  the  whole  context  which  looks  that  way.^ 
The  Blood  which  is  being  shed  unto  remission  of  sins  is  the 
Blood  of  the  Sin-Offering.  The  Body  which  is  being  given 
for  man  is  the  Flesh  of  the  Sacrifice.  In  the  actual  record 
of  the  Lord's  death  there  is  no  clear  indication  of  its  sacri- 
ficial character;  we  have  this  in  the  institution  of  the 
Lord's  Supper  which  went  immediately  before.  The 
words  of  the  institution  recall  the  sin-offering  of  the  Old 

'■  Lev.  iv.  3-21  ;  vi.  25-30;  ix.  8-11  ;  Heb.  x.  4  ;  xiii.  11. 

-  Matt.  xxvi.  26-28  ;  Mark  xiv.  22-24  ;  LulvC  xxii.  19,  20  ; 
I  Cor.  xi.  23-25.  Tfie  four  records  sliould  be  compared,  and  the 
slight  verbal  differences  noted.  It  seems  right  to  insist  on  the  exact 
force  of  the  present  participles  SiSo/xevov  and  iKxwojxevov. 

'  More  stress  has  been  laid  on  the  words  iroiuTe  and  avaixvrjtns 
than,  taken  by  themselves,  they  will  bear.  Their  sacrificial  sense  is 
determined  by  the  context  and  the  occasion. 

M 


1 62        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Testament,  and  the  special  covenant- offering  that  was 
made  at  Sinai.  The  occasion  recalls  the  Passover,  and 
this  connection  St.  Paul  brings  out :  "  Our  passover  also 
hath  been  sacrificed,  even  Christ :  wherefore  let  us  keep 
the  feast."  ^  The  Passover,  a  sacrifice  which  preceded 
the  special  institutions  of  the  Law  and  was  continued 
side  by  side  with  them,  had  the  closest  connection  with 
the  peace-ofifering.  At  the  same  time  it  was  eminently  a 
sacrifice  of  redemption,  and  by  the  importance  attached 
to  the  sprinkling  of  the  blood  it  was  linked  to  the  sin- 
offering.  In  the  Sacrifice  of  the  New  Testament  all 
these  distinctions  are  gathered  into  unity. 

The  command  of  the  Lord,  "  Do  this  in  remembrance 
of  me,"  marks  the  continuance  of  the  sacrificial  action 
by  the  Church.  There  is  only  one  Sacrifice,  one  Victim, 
a  final  and  sufficient  oblation,  satisfaction,  and  propitia- 
tion for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world;  and  this  abides 
continually.  In  the  Lord's  Supper,  by  the  separate 
representation  of  the  Body  and  the  Blood,  Christ  is 
mystically  set  forth  in  victim-state.  ^Ve  proclaim  the 
Lord's  death,  says  St.  Paul.  Certain  theologians  have 
sought  to  identify  the  sacrifice  of  the  Church  with  the 
perpetual  presentment  in  heaven  of  the  "  Lamb  standing 
as  though  it  had  been  slain."  Heaven  and  earth  are 
held  to  be  linked  together  in  worship.  The  sacrifice  of 
the  Mass,  says  Thomassin,  is  identical  with  the  sacrifice 
of  Heaven.  But  this  opinion  is  seriously  contested. 
The  emphatic  language  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
declaring  that  Christ,  having  offered  his  one  sacrifice, 
"  sat  down  on  the  right  hand  of  God,"  seems,  it  is  said, 
purposely  to  exclude  the  idea  of  a  continued  sacrificial 
act  in  heaven.  His  entrance  into  heaven  "  through  his 
own  Blood  "  is  unquestionably  sacrificial ;  but  the  eftect 
'   Exod.  xxiv.  5-8  ;  i  Cor.  v.  7. 


The  Atonement  163 

was  at  once  complete.  And  again,  the  Ascension  is  the 
fulfilment  of  the  type  of  the  annual  entry  of  the  high 
priest  into  the  Holy  of  Holies.  But  the  high  priest's 
offering  of  the  blood  within  the  veil  did  not  continue 
throughout  the  year ;  the  effect  of  his  entry  was  to  sanctify 
the  courts  of  the  Temple  for  the  continual  offerings.  In 
like  manner,  it  is  urged,  the  entry  of  Christ  into  the 
heavenly  sanctuary  hallows  the  Church  for  the  continu- 
ance of  the  one  offering.  Sacrifice  indeed  is  a  mode  of 
approaching  God  proper  to  earth  and  not  to  heaven.-' 

Between  these  diverging  opinions  it  is  needless  to 
judge.  Equally  needless  it  is  to  enter  into  the  elaborate 
reasonings  of  those  who  since  the  sixteenth  century  have 
discussed  the  nature  of  the  Christian  Sacrifice.  This 
only  should  be  noted,  that  where  the  word  sacrifice  is 
used  to  signify  the  death  of  the  victim,  there  the 
Sacrifice  of  Christ  will  be  regarded  as  an  act  complete 
in  a  moment  of  time  upon  the  Cross  ;  but  when  the 
word  is  used  in  its  truer  and  fuller  sense,  it  signifies 
the  whole  action  which  is  continuous  till  the  end  of 
time. 

This  continuous  offering  effects  a  continual  atonement, 
not  only  for  sins  that  are  past,  but  for  those  which  daily 
recur.  The  atonement  is  perfect ;  therefore  the  Church 
that  offers  eats  also  the  flesh  of  the  sin-offering.  "  We 
have  an  altar,  whereof  they  have  no  right  to  eat  which  serve 
the  tabernacle."  ^  The  sin-offering  and  the  peace-offering 
are  one.  But  more  than  this  :  we  are  bidden  to  drink 
of  the  Blood.  That  symbol  of  life  was  all  poured  out 
before  God  in  the  sacrifices  that  were  before  Christ :  the 
offerer  gave  the  whole  life  in  substitution  for  his  own. 

'  I  Cor.  xi.  26;  Rev.  v.  6  ;  Heh.  ix.  1-14  ;  x.  12.     Thomassin, 
De  hicarn.  Verbi,  x.  24-5. 
"^  Heb.  xiii.  10. 


164        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

But  the  i\tonement  being  complete,  the  Life  itself  of  the 
Lamb  of  God,  which  he  laid  down  for  us  and  took  to 
himself  again,  is  given  also  to  us.  He  not  only  died  for 
us,  and  rose  again,  but  he  lives  in  us,  and  we  in  him. 

There  are  some  words  used  in  presenting  the  doctrine 
of  the  Atonement  which  call  for  a  passing  note.  Of 
Justification  we  shall  have  to  speak  more  at  length. 
The  terms  propitiatioii  and  expiation  are  even  more 
characteristic  of  Gentile  sacrifices  than  of  the  Mosaic  or 
Christian.  They  were  derived  from  an  imperfect  con- 
ception of  the  Divine  Nature  :  the  wrath  of  God  was 
thought  of  as  arbitrary  and  removable  by  means  of 
gifts.  This  idea,  chastened  and  corrected  in  the  Old 
Testament,  is  in  the  New  Testament  absorbed  into  the 
larger  truth  of  the  Love  of  God,  who  desires  the  self- 
surrender  of  his  creatures,  that  in  him  they  may  find  their 
perfect  blessedness.  The  wrath  of  God  is  then  seen  to 
be  nothing  else  but  his  perfect  will,  addressed  to  the 
correction  of  evil.  In  the  Christian  sense  God  is  pro- 
pitiated, and  sins  are  expiated,  by  an  action  that  brings  the 
sinner  under  the  sanctifying  influence  of  the  Love  of  God. 

Not  altogether  dissimilar  is  the  history  of  the  word 
satisfaction.  Starting  from  the  crude  idea  that  by  sin 
God  was  defrauded  of  his  rights,  and  that  something  must 
be  given  as  a  quid  pro  q7io,  men  were  led  through  the 
teaching  of  the  Law  to  recognize  the  utter  inadequacy 
of  any  such  transaction  ;  in  the  Gospel  is  revealed  the 
perfect  holiness  of  God,  and  his  requirement  of  a  corre- 
sponding holiness  in  his  creatures,  a  requirement  that  is 
satisfied  in  the  sacrifice  of  Christ,  not  so  much  by  his 
death  as  by  his  obedience  in  dying. 

The  word  redemption,  though  not  unknown  to  Gentile 
religion,  is  more  proper  to  revelation.  Its  meaning  is 
deliverance  at  a  price  from  slavery  or  from  the  power  of 


The  Atonement  165 

an  enemy.  It  is  a  figure  drawn  from  the  ransom  of 
captives.  The  idea  lies  at  the  root  of  all  sacrifice ;  it 
was  made  prominent  in  the  Law,  and  remains  not  less 
prominent  in  the  Gospel.^  It  has  given  occasion,  almost 
from  the  first  age  of  Christian  teaching,  to  speculations, 
rather  curious  than  profitable,  concerning  the  payment  of 
the  ransom  and  its  recipient.  All  that  is  certain  is  con- 
tained in  the  statement  that  man,  being  by  sin  deprived 
of  his  liberty  and  subject  to  death,  is  now  set  free  and 
receives  the  gift  of  life.  This  was  symbolized  in  the  Old 
Testament  by  the  substitution  of  a  victim  bound  and 
delivered  to  death ;  it  is  effectually  realized  in  the  New 
Testament  through  the  submission  and  death  of  Christ. 

This  introduces  the  remaining  word  that  needs  com- 
ment. A  sacrifice  is  a  substitntion.  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
is  said  to  have  suffered  for  us  vicariously.  Crudely 
stated,  this  appears  to  be  an  act  of  mechanical  justice. 
Examined  a  little  more  closely,  it  seems  to  involve  a 
profound  injustice.  The  sinless  would  seem  to  be 
punished  instead  of  sinners,  their  guilt  being  trans- 
ferred or  imputed  to  him,  his  innocence  to  them.  Indeed 
the  language  of  Christian  teaching,  and  still  more  of 
Christian  devotion,  not  unfrequently  assumes  this  colour. 
The  exceeding  love  of  Christ  is  thus  commended  to  us, 
in  that  he  has  taken  our  place  and  borne  the  curse  for  us. 
But  this  is  only  part  of  the  truth,  and  to  stop  here  does 
involve  radical  injustice.     In  the  doctrine  of  Sacrifice 

*  The  words  XvTpov,  XvTpovaQai,  xirpoiais,  and  intensively 
a.'KoXvTpiiKns,  are  of  frequent  occurrence.  In  Gal.  iii.  13,  iv.  5,  the 
word  i^ayopa^eiv,  which  emphasizes  more  the  idea  of  purchase,  is 
exceptionally  used  for  deliverance  from  the  special  burdens  imposed 
by  the  Mosaic  Law.  This  verbal  distinction  is  not  preserved  in  the 
Latin  or  English  versions.  The  word  ayopa^eiv,  in  i  Cor.  vi.  20 ; 
vii.  23  ;  2  Pet.  ii.  I  ;  Rev.  v.  9,  and  elsewhere,  appears  to  be  used  in 
a  similar  but  not  an  identical  sense. 


1 66        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

substitution  must  pass  into  identification.  It  is  a  moral 
identification,  founded  on  a  perfect  union  of  wills.  The 
Incarnate  Word  in  the  exercise  of  his  human  will  offered 
himself  for  all  men  ;  that  is  to  say,  in  the  greatness  of 
his  love  he  desired  his  perfect  obedience  unto  death  to 
be  not  his  alone,  but  that  of  all  whom  he  draws  to  himself. 
His  sacrifice  is  finally  effectual  for  those  who  respond  to 
his  desire — who  seek,  as  St.  Paul  says,  to  fill  up  that 
which  is  lacking  of  the  afflictions  of  Christ,  knowing  his 
sufferings,  and  becoming  conformed  to  his  death.  On 
his  part  the  Atonement  is  complete  \  on  our  part  is 
needed  the  response  of  love.^ 

Sect.   III. — The  Doctrine  of  Grace 

The  Incarnation  is  the  redemption  of  man  in  the 
Person  of  Jesus  Chrrst.  The  Atonement  is  the  re- 
demption of  men  collectively  and  individually  by  the 
offering  of  Christ.  This  redemption  is  universal.  He 
died  for  all.  He  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all.  He  took 
flesh  in  order  that  by  the  grace  of  God  he  should  taste 
death  for  every  man.  He  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins, 
says  St.  John  :  and  not  for  ours  only,  but  also  for  the 
whole  world.  Through  one  act  of  righteousness,  says 
St.  Paul,  the  free  gift  came  unto  all  men  to  justification 
of  life,2  There  is  no  truth  on  which  the  sacred  writers 
more  strongly  insist.  It  is  strange  that  any  should  be 
found,  as  among  Calvinists  and  Jansenists,  to  empty 
their  words  of  meaning,  and  to  maintain  that  Christ 
offered  himself  for  the  redemption  only  of  certain  chosen 
souls. 

'   Col.  i.  24  ;  Phil.  iii.  10. 

"^  2   Cor.    V.    15 ;    I    Tim.    ii.    6  ;    Ilcb.    ii.    9 ;    i    John  ii.    2 ; 
Rom.  V.  18. 


TJie  Doctrine  of  Grace  167 

The  effect  of  the  Atonement  is  to  raise  men  to 
the  state  of  Grace,  We  have  ah-eady  used  this  word 
when  speaking  of  the  original  state  of  man.  We  must 
now  consider  very  carefully  what  it  means.  Grace 
means,  in  the  first  place,  beauty,  regarded  as  giving 
pleasure  to  the  beholder.  By  the  writers  of  the  New 
Testament  the  word  is  used  exclusively  of  spiritual  grace 
or  beauty  of  character,  and  chiefly  of  this  regarded  as 
pleasing  to  God.  Secondly,  it  stands  for  the  favourable 
regard  which  the  beholder  has  for  those  with  whom  he 
is  well  pleased,  and  so  for  kindly  favour  in  general ;  in 
particular,  for  the  good  will  of  God  toward  his  people. 
Thirdly,  it  signifies  the  special  act  of  kindness  which 
bestows  on  a  man  more  than  he  deserves,  more  than  he 
can  claim  by  right,  or,  as  St.  Paul  puts  it,  more  than  is 
reckoned  as  of  debt.  Fourthly,  it  is  used  for  the  sense 
of  gratitude  in  the  recipient  of  such  bounty.  These 
are  the  natural  meanings  of  the  word,  fixed  by  the 
ordinary  use  of  language.  They  enter  in  varying  degree 
into  the  specific  sense  which  it  bears  in  Christian 
teaching.^ 

Man  lost  by  sin  the  spiritual  beauty  with  which  the 
Creator  endowed  him.  Supernatural  grace  was  gone, 
and  the  natural  graces  of  the  human  character  were 
marred.  But  even  if  these  last  were  recovered  in  their 
perfection,  if  man  should  develop  his  natural  excellencies 
to  the  highest  degree,  still  he  would  not  become  all  that 
God  meant  him  to  be.  He  was  designed  for  something 
better,  and  until  that  better  were  attained,  he  would  fall 

'  Rom.  iv.  4.  We  argue,  of  course,  from  the  Greek  x"P'^)  with 
its  derivatives  xapi^etrflai,  x"P'<''M«>  ^'id  x^P'''""*'''-  The  Latin 
gratia,  the  English  grace,  are  used  as  equivalents,  and  their  sense 
follows  that  of  the  original.  The  use  of  the  word  as  a  rendering  of 
evirpfireia.  in  the  English  version  of  Jas.  i.  ii  is  unfortunate. 


1 68        Tlie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

short  of  the  end  of  his  being.    Therefore,  although  moral 
effort  after  good,  even  in  the  most  abject  of  creatures, 
must  be  always  pleasing  to  God,  yet  there  is  something 
lacking  \    God  cannot  be  rightly  well  pleased  with   the 
merely  natural  man,  still  less  with  fallen  man.     Nor  is 
it  possible  for  man  by  the  exercise  of  his  natural  powers 
to  earn  for  himself  supernatural  endowments.     He  may 
conceivably  earn   all   possible   rewards   that  are  in  the 
order  of  nature,  but   no   more.      If  he   receive   more, 
it   can  only  be    of  the  free   bounty  of  God,  not  as  of 
debt.     We  are  shut  up  then  to  this,  that  we  can  enter 
into  favour  with  God  and  become  well  pleasing  to  him, 
only  by  receiving  of  his  bounty  that  supernatural  beauty 
which  is  required  for  our  perfection  according  to  his  will. 
This  is  what  we  mean  by  the  Grace  of  God.     We  may 
pass  by  the  instances  of  such  grace  given  to  individual 
persons  under  the  Old  Testament ;  they  were  exceptional, 
and  we   know   not  the  measure  of  the  gift.      We  may 
on  the   same   ground   pass   by   the   case   of  the   ever- 
blessed  Mother  of  God,  hailed  by  the  angel  Gabriel  as 
endued  with  grace.     We  come  to  the  Incarnate  Word 
himself,  who   dwelt   among   us   full  of  grace.      In    his 
perfect  manhood,  as  well  as  in  the  truth  of  his  Divine 
Nature,  he  was  the  beloved  Son,  well  pleasing  to  the 
Father.     We  see  in  him  the  perfection  of  all   natural 
graces,  the   perfection   also    of  supernatural   grace,  his 
manhood  enriched  by  personal  union  with  the  Godhead. 
Both  are  perhaps  indicated  when  we  are  told  that  he 
advanced  in  grace,  in  favour  with  God  and  men ;  we 
need   not   too   curiously  ask  which  is  meant  when  we 
read  that  men  wondered   at   the   words   of  grace  pro- 
ceeding out  of  his  mouth.     The  power  of  holiness  that 
was  in  the  humanity  of  Jesus  Christ  was  the  free  gift 
of  God.     It  was  not  a  reward  for  his  obedience;  it  was 


The  Doctrine  of  Grace  169 

that  which  made  his  obedience  possible.  God  anointed 
him  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  power,  crowned  him 
with  glory  and  honour.  For  his  obedience  there  was 
more  given;  he  was  heard  for  his  godly  fear;  he  was 
perfected  for  his  work  by  his  suffering  obedience ;  but 
still  it  was  by  the  grace  of  God  that  he  tasted  death  for 
every  man/ 

In  the  Person  of  Jesus  Christ  man  was  brought  into 
favour  with  God.  But  the  immediate  effect  extends 
beyond  his  own  Person.  He  redeemed  all  men.  All, 
by  the  virtue  of  his  Atonement,  are  brought  into  a  new 
relation  to  God.  "  The  grace  of  God  hath  appeared, 
bringing  salvation  to  all  men."  ^  A  new  dignity  is  given 
to  the  human  race,  bought  with  such  a  price.  As  the 
redemption  of  Israel  from  Egypt  brought  the  nation  as 
a  whole  into  a  new  relation  of  favour  with  God,  so  the 
redemption  of  the  world  by  Jesus  Christ  endues  all 
mankind  with  a  corresponding  favour.  The  love  of 
God  is  one  unchanging  act  of  will,  but  in  regard  to  its 
manifestation  we  distinguish  between  the  love  that 
brought  to  pass  the  Incarnation,  and  the  love  that  is 
bestowed  upon  redeemed  humanity.  This  latter  is  a 
favourable  regard  towards  those  whom  the  beloved  Son 
represents,  rendering  in  the  community  of  their  flesh 
his  offering  of  perfect  obedience,  a  perfect  human  service. 
There  is  a  grace  which  is  universal. 

But  we  mean  more  than  this  by  the  state  of  grace. 

'  Luke  i.  28  ;  ii.  52 ;  iii.  22  ;  iv.  22  ;  John  i.  14  ;  Acts  x.  38  ; 
Heb.  ii.  9,  10  ;  v.  7. 

"  Titus  ii.  II.  The  alternative  rendering,  which  connects  iirecpdvri 
with  Traaiv  dvdpioiroLs,  does  but  slightly  weaken  the  force  of  the  words, 
making  them  mean  that  the  light  of  God's  favour  has  extended  to 
all.  Compare  the  collect,  "  Deus,  qui  humanae  substantiae  dignita- 
tem mirabiliter  condidisti,  et  mirabilius  reformasti,"  etc. 


I/O        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

To  stop  here  is  to  rest  in  a  kind  of  Semipelagianism. 
Complete  Pelagianism  is  the  denial  of  original  sin,  the 
assertion  of  a  natural  power  in  man  to  rise  to  all  perfec- 
tion. It  is  hardly  a  less  pernicious  error  to  hold  that  a 
soul  once  redeemed/  and  so  brought  into  a  new  relation 
of  favour  with  God,  is  able  to  advance  by  virtue  of  this 
liberation  to  all  supernatural  excellence.  This  opinion 
with  regard  to  the  operation  of  grace  is  not  unlike  that 
of  the  Deists  in  regard  to  the  operation  of  nature.  It 
assumes  an  original  impulse  given  by  the  Divine  Will, 
but  excludes  the  abiding  activity  of  God.  The  broad 
teaching  of  the  New  Testament  is  that  for  the  attainment 
of  salvation  each  man  needs,  not  only  an  original  accept- 
ance into  favour,  but  a  continual  outpouring  of  God's 
grace.  The  grace  of  God  is  multiform ;  we  have  gifts 
differing  according  to  the  grace  that  was  given  to  us  ;  of 
his  fulness  we  receive  grace  for  grace,  favour  upon 
favour.^  T'o  be  in  the  continual  reception  of  that  which 
God  thus  bestows  is  to  be  in  the  state  of  grace. 

There  follows  from  this  a  meaning  of  the  word  which 
is  peculiarly  and  characteristically  Christian.  We  owe  it 
perhaps  to  St.  Paul  himself,  but  to  St.  Paul  as  delivering 
the  truth  which  he  had  received  from  the  Lord.  It 
signifies  the  help  of  God,  without  which  no  man  can 
either  escape  from  sin  or  continue  in  the  way  of  salva- 
tion.    The  need  of  this  continual  help,  as  alone  making 

'  Or  even  regenerate  :  this  being  one  of  the  forms  of  Semipelagian 
error  condemned  by  Celestine  I.  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Bishops  of 
Gaul,  c.  vi.  (Denzinger,  Enchiridion,  p.  26). 

-  I  Pet.  iv.  10  (ttoi/ciAtj)  ;  Rom.  xii.  6;  John  i.  16.  I  take 
this  last  difficult  passage  in  the  sense  given  to  it  by  St.  Augustine, 
Tract.  \\\.  in  Joan.,  §  10:  "  De  bonitatis  eius  accepimus.  Quid? 
Remissionem  peccatorum,  ut  iustificaremur  ex  fide.  Et  insuper  quid  ? 
Et  graiiam  pro  gratia  ;  id  est,  pro  hac  gratia  in  qua  ex  fide  vivimus, 
recepluri  sumus  aliam."     See  p.  177,  note  *. 


Tlie  Doctrine  of  Grace  171 

man  able  to  please  God,  was  maintained  with  the 
greatest  emphasis  by  St.  Paul  against  the  Judaizing 
opinion  that  a  careful  observance  of  certain  rules  of  life 
could  of  itself  secure  the  Divine  favour.  This  is  the 
moral  significance  of  his  favourite  antithesis  between  law 
and  grace.  The  doctrine  was  little  in  evidence,  because 
little  needed,  during  the  first  Christian  centuries.  The 
rise  of  the  Pelagian  heresy  gave  it  a  new  importance,  the 
antithesis  now  being  between  nature  and  grace,  and 
the  Church  found  in  St.  Augustine  the  doctor  who  was 
to  formulate  the  teaching  of  the  gospel  in  reply  to  the 
question  thus  forced  to  the  front.  It  cannot  be  denied 
that  in  the  stress  of  controversy  St.  Augustine  was  pushed 
to  exaggeration.  He  was  careful  to  guard  some  of  his 
own  expressions  in  his  book  of  Retractations.  He  left 
others  unguarded  which  in  later  days  were  made  to 
shelter  new  errors.  But  in  the  main  his  exposition  of 
the  doctrine  of  grace,  fortified  by  many  conciliar  decrees, 
was  adopted  by  the  whole  Church.  In  Western  Chris- 
tendom it  entered  most  peculiarly  into  the  language  of 
public  worship.  The  collects  of  the  Latin  Sacramen- 
taries  were  saturated  with  its  terms,  which  survive,  but 
little  obscured,  in  our  English  version. 

Christian  doctrine  is  concerned  chiefly  with  this 
auxiliary  grace.  But  the  primary  meaning  of  the  word 
is  never  to  be  lost  sight  of.  It  determines  the  nature 
and  the  purpose  of  the  help  given.  Bearing  this  in  mind, 
we  may  briefly  summarize  the  doctrine  of  grace  as 
follows. 

Man  is  born  in  a  state  of  sin.  He  is  necessarily  dis- 
pleasing to  the  holiness  of  God.  Out  of  this  state  he 
cannot  raise  himself.  He  cannot  even  choose  what  is 
good,  save  in  a  halting  way,  since  the  freedom  of  his 
will  is  impaired  by  the  corruption  of  his  nature ;    still 


1/2        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

less  can  he  perform  even  the  imperfect  good  that  he 
purposes.  He  thus  lies  in  the  wrath  of  God,  But  by 
reason  of  the  perfect  service  of  the  Incarnate  Word,  the 
Son  of  Man,  the  whole  of  mankind  is  brought  into  a 
new  relation  of  favour  with  God ;  human  nature  has 
become  pleasing  to  him.  There  is  grace  for  all. 
Individual  men  however  are  still  alienated  from  God  by 
the  aversion  of  their  wills.  But  in  pursuance  of  the 
new  favour  or  grace  that  is  come  by  Jesus  Christ,  God 
enables  men  severally  to  address  their  wills  to  the  choice 
of  good.  If  a  man  respond  to  this  enabling  grace,  which 
he  receives  by  the  free  gift  of  God,  and  which  he  is  free 
to  use  or  to  neglect,  he  is  brought  into  the  state  of  grace ; 
he  is  the  object  of  God's  favour,  he  receives  further  help, 
enabling  him  to  develop  graces  of  character,  and  to  live 
a  life  of  grateful  service  ;  continuing  thus  he  receives  the 
final  grace  of  perseverance  to  the  end.  At  every  stage 
without  the  gracious  help  of  God  he  can  do  nothing 
further ;  and  equally  at  every  stage  he  is  free  to  resist  the 
Divine  influence,  and  to  decline  from  the  grace  received. 

We  may  distinguish  between  grace  regarded  as  the 
mere  gift  of  God,  and  grace  regarded  in  its  effect  as 
making  the  recipient  well  pleasing  to  God.  It  is  wider 
in  the  former  regard,  and  will  include  those  special  gifts 
which  are  called  by  St.  Paul  charismata.  These  are 
powers  bestowed  by  God  not  so  much  with  a  view  to 
the  personal  salvation  or  perfection  of  the  recipient,  as 
for  the  purpose  of  enabling  him  to  fill  his  place  in  the 
company  of  God's  people.  They  belong  therefore  more 
especially  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Church. 

We  are  not  here  concerned  with  the  profound  questions 
of  theology  which  gather  round  the  doctrine  of  grace, 
and  which  at  various  times,  and  especially  in  the  sixteenth 
and   seventeenth    centuries,    have   been    the    subject    of 


■     The  Doctrine  of  Grace  173 

strenuous  controversy.  One  question  however  is  too 
fundamental  to  be  wholly  passed  by.  The  insoluble 
problem  of  reconciling  the  freedom  of  the  creature  with 
the  sovereignty  of  the  Creator  reappears  in  this  connection. 
God  wills  the  salvation  of  a  man  ;  he  appoints  the  means 
of  salvation,  and  gives  them  by  his  grace.  How  can  his 
Will  be  frustrated?  An  exaggerated  answer  on  the  one 
hand  says  that  grace,  which  God  gives  to  whom  he  will, 
is  an  irresistible  influence ;  that  as  no  man  can  be  saved 
without  it,  so  no  man  to  whom  it  is  granted  can  fail 
of  salvation.  This  is  the  teaching  of  Jansenism  and 
Calvinism.  An  exaggerated  answer  on  the  other  side 
leans  to  Pelagianism,  and  exalts  the  freedom  of  man  to 
the  extent  of  making  the  grace  of  God  little  more  than  a 
general  support  of  human  effort.  As  we  have  seen  before, 
we  have  no  means  of  correlating  the  two  facts  of  God's 
infinite  will  and  man's  freedom.  We  can  say  only  that 
God  wills  man  to  be  free,  and  leave  the  problem  there 
unsolved.^ 

Setting  aside  these  questions,  we  must  ask  what  are  the 
effects  of  grace  in  the  individual  man.  The  first  effect 
is  Justification.  This  word  means  in  common  language 
the  acquittal  of  an  accused  person.  ^  In  the  language  of 
revelation  a  man  is  said  to  be  justified  when  he  is  dis- 
charged of  the  guilt  of  sin.  But  how  can  God,  the 
righteous  Judge,  acquit  sinners  ?  It  is  not  enough  to  say 
that  he  does  it  of  grace,  for  we  may  not  set  his  attributes 
of  mercy  and  justice  in  opposition.     A  human  tribunal 

'  See  Note  E. 

'  I  do  not  forget  that  Iiko-ioxiv  is  used  by  Greek  authors  alike  of 
condemning  and  acquitting.  It  was  to  do  justice  one  way  or  the 
other.  There  is  a  curious  parallel  in  the  Scottish  use  of  the  word 
justify  in  the  sense  of  execute  justice.  But  this  other  sense  does  not 
appear  in  the  Scriptural  or  theological  use  of  the  word. 


174        T^Jif^  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

may  acquit  the  guilty  tiirough  ignorance  or  carelessness, 
or  by  an  arbitrary  act  of  mercy.  Not  so  God.  If  then 
he  discharge  sinners  of  their  guilt,  it  is  because  in  some 
way  their  guilt  ceases  to  be.  In  strict  justice,  a  human 
tribunal  can  only  declare  the  man  innocent  who  was  not 
guilty  in  fact.  But  God,  who  calleth  the  things  that  are 
not  as  though  they  were,  can  do  more. 

The  grace  of  God  which  is  won  for  us  by  the  merits 
of  Jesus  Christ,  moving  a  man  to  will  what  is  good, 
moves  him  also  to  recognize  in  Jesus  Christ  the  power  of 
holiness  triumphing  over  sin,  a  power  which  he  sees  made 
accessible  to  man.  This  recognition  is  faith  in  Jesus 
Christ.  He  is  further  moved  by  grace  to  a  grateful  love 
and  service,  and  enabled  to  make  a  beginning  herein 
by  some  act  of  self-surrender.  The  power  of  the  life 
of  Christ,  who  was  raised  for  our  justification,  is  com- 
municated to  him,  so  that  henceforth  Christ  may  live  in 
him,  and  he  may  live  his  life  in  the  power  of  the  Son 
of  God.  Hereupon  his  sins  are  not  merely  forgiven ; 
they  are  done  away.  The  guilt  of  sin  being  nothing  else 
but  the  aversion  of  the  man  from  God,  so  soon  as  he  is 
effectually  turned  to  God  his  guilt  ceases.  The  man  is 
justified.  He  still  has  to  bear  the  natural  consequences 
of  his  natural  acts  and  of  the  nature  which  he  received 
from  his  fathers;  he  must  suffer  and  die.  But  in  his 
new  condition  he  is  approved  of  God,  and  accounted 
righteous. 

It  is  not  therefore  difficult  to  see  why  St.  Paul  teaches 
that  we  are  justified  by  grace,  and  almost  in  the  same 
breath  asserts  that  we  are  justified  by  faith  apart  from 
the  works  of  the  Law,  while  St.  James  emphatically 
declares  that  a  man  is  justified  not  by  faith  only  but  by 
works.  They  are  three  partial  statements  of  the  whole 
truth,  which  St.  Paul  gathers  up  elsewhere  by  saying  that 


The  Doctrine  of  Grace  175 

to  rely  on  Law  for  justification  is  to  fall  away  from  grace, 
and  that  what  avails  is  faith  working  through  love/ 

We  have  so  far  considered  the  justification  of  a 
conscious  subject,  who  responds  to  the  first  movement  of 
grace  and  surrenders  himself  to  its  operation.  But  infants 
are  justified  as  well,  and  brought  into  the  state  of  grace. 
In  their  case  the  operation  is  simpler,  and  at  the  same 
time  less  intelligible.  It  is  simpler  because  there  is  no 
element  of  personal  action  on  the  part  of  the  recipient 
of  grace.  It  is  less  intelligible  because  all  takes  place  in 
a  soul  that  is  not  conscious  of  itself,  a  region  that  lies 
outside  our  experience.  Of  the  fact  we  are  assured. 
The  infant  was  born  in  sin  ;  he  is  freed  from  the  inherited 
guilt  and  stain  of  sin.  The  operation  is  obscure,  an  act 
of  the  hidden  wisdom  of  God.  Grace  cannot  be  said  to 
move  the  infant's  will,  for  his  will  is  not  yet  capable  of 
movement ;  still  less  can  he  be  moved  to  faith.  It  may 
be  said  however  that  the  movement  of  the  will  is  not  part 
of  the  active  cause  of  justification  ;  it  is  necessary  only 
because  the  human  will,  acting  under  the  impulse  or 
constraint  of  sinful  nature,  opposes  the  action  of  grace, 
which  opposition  must  be  removed  by  the  conversion  of 
the  will.  But  the  faculty  of  will  in  the  infant  is  not 
yet  active ;  it  does  not  therefore  interpose  any  bar  to 
the  action  of  grace.  The  self-surrender  of  faith,  again, 
is  necessary  only  because  the  mind  has  been  actually 
turned  away  from  God  ;  but  the  mind  of  the  infant, 
though  born  with  a  native  tendency  in  that  direction,  has 
not  yet  acted.  There  is  thus  nothing  to  hinder  the  free 
action  of  grace  upon  the  soul,  purging  its  inherited 
corruption,  correcting  its  native  tendency  to  evil,  and  so 
rendering  it  acceptable  to  God  or  justified.  But  these 
considerations  belong  rather  to  speculation  than  to 
'  Rom.  iii.  24,  28 ;  Jas.  ii.  24  ;  Gal.  v.  4-6. 


176        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

doctrine.  \Vhat  we  are  taught  is  the  fact  that  infants 
are  freely  justified  by  grace. 

The  effect  of  continuing  grace  is  the  development  of 
holiness,  or  sanctification.  Justification  and  sanctification 
are  not  to  be  set  apart  by  a  hard  and  fast  distinction. 
They  are  the  beginning  and  the  carrying  on  of  the  same 
operation.  God  does  not  justify  without  imparting 
holiness;  the  first  vocation  of  the  Christian  is  to  be  a 
saint.  Nor  is  the  operation  necessarily  one  of  unbroken 
continuity.  A  man  may  fall  from  the  state  of  grace  by 
an  act  of  deadly  sin ;  his  renewal  by  repentance  is  a 
fresh  justification.  Repentance  means  precisely  that 
change  of  attitude  towards  God,  produced  by  grace 
moving  the  will,  which  makes  it  possible  to  discharge  the 
sinner  of  guilt.  ^  The  work  of  sanctification  is  then 
resumed.  The  true  distinction  is  that  between  the  power 
of  grace  effecting  a  change  in  the  man's  state,  and  the 
same  power  maintaining  and  perfecting  him  in  his  new 
state,  the  state  of  grace,  called  also  the  state  of 
salvation. 

We  have  set  aside  the  complications  of  theological 
science,  but  it  may  be  useful  to  note  the  principal  terms 
and  distinctions  used  in  discussing  the  doctrine  of  grace. 
Theologians  distinguish  actual  and  habittial  grace.  The 
former  is  an  influence  directly  moving  the  will  or  helping 
the  recipient  to  perform  that  which  he  wills.  The  latter 
is  the  Divine  influence  abiding  in  the  soul,  directing  the 
ordinary  course  of  Christian  life,  and  rendering  the 
possessor  pleasing  in  the  sight  of  God.  They  distin- 
guish/;rt'mz>«/  and  subsequent  grace.     These  terms  are 

'  No  language  of  Western  Europe  has  a  word  answering  exactly 
to  iKiTavofiv,  which  is  rendered  in  Latin  paenitenliam  agere,  in 
English  repent.  The  sense  of  the  words  in  use  must  be  determined 
by  the  sense  of  this,  the  original  term  of  Christian  teaching. 


The  Doctrine  of  Grace  lyj 

relative  to  the  effect  of  grace.  The  help  of  God  works 
in  us  a  given  effect,  and  following  that  up  works  a  further 
and  consequent  effect.  By  prevenient  grace,  says  St. 
Augustine,  we  are  healed ;  by  subsequent  grace  when 
healed  we  are  quickened  and  refreshed ;  by  the  one  we 
are  called,  by  the  other  we  are  glorified.'  In  much  the 
same  way  grace  is  distinguished  as  operating  and  co- 
operating^ the  one  moving  the  will,  the  other  aiding  in 
the  accomplishment  of  what  is  willed.  It  is  distinguished 
again  for  deeper  questions,  into  sufficient  and  effectual 
grace.  The  former  term  is  derived  from  the  encourage- 
ment given  to  St.  Paul,  "  My  grace  is  sufficient  for 
thee,"  ^  but  the  meaning  is  extended.  On  the  principle 
that  he  who  wills  the  end  wills  the  means,  it  is  said  that 
God,  willing  the  salvation  of  men,  gives  them  grace 
sufficient  for  the  attainment  of  salvation,  but  in  some  only 
does  it  become  effectual.  On  the  relation  between  these 
two  aspects  of  grace  have  turned  some  of  the  darkest  of 
controversies.  It  has  not  been  the  will  of  God  to  reveal 
to  us  the  whole  of  his  working.^ 

In  reviewing  these  distinctions,  however,  it  is  important 
to  bear  in  mind  that  the  grace  of  God,  though  diverse  in 
its  effect,  is  one  undivided  operation  of  his  love  and 
power.  Essentially  it  is  nothing  else  but  that  partaking 
of  the  Divine  Nature  which  is  conferred  on  us  through 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord.* 

'  Aug.,  De  Nat.  et  Grat.,  c.  31  :  "  Praevenit  ut  sanemur,  quia  et 
subsequetur  ut  etiam  sanati  vegetemur  ;  praevenit  ut  vocemur,  sub- 
sequetur  utglorificemur."  It  is  the  distinction  noted  in  the  collect, 
"  Prevent  us,  O  Lord,  in  all  our  doings  with  thy  most  gracious 
favour,  and  further  us  with  thy  continual  help,"  etc. 

-  2  Cor.  xii.  9. 

3  See  Note  E. 

*  2  Pet.  i.  4.  Sum.  Theol.,  1-2.  112.  i  :  "Nihil  aliud  quam 
quaedam  participatio  divinae  naturae." 

N 


178        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 


Sect.  IV. — Eternal  Life 

Death  came  into  the  world  by  sin,  and  to  every  man 
severally  death  is  the  wages  of  sin.  This  natural 
consequence  of  the  sinful  state  in  which  we  are  born  does 
not  disappear  when  guilt  is  done  away  by  the  grace  of 
justification.  The  pardoned  and  justified  sinner  still  has 
to  live  the  life  which  is  a  progress  towards  death,  and 
to  undergo  the  death  to  which  it  leads.  But  the  first 
entrance  into  the  state  of  salvation  is  spoken  of  as  the 
beginning  of  a  new  life.  It  is  at  once  a  death  and  a 
birth ;  a  death  unto  sin,  and  a  new  birth  unto  righteous- 
ness. We  are  dead  with  Christ,  says  St.  Paul ;  we  are 
mystically  made  to  share  his  death,  and  by  thus  dying 
we  are  justified  from  sin.  From  this  death  we  rise 
again,  by  the  power  of  his  resurrection,  to  walk  in  new- 
ness of  life.  Here  we  obviously  have  figurative  language, 
but  in  the  figure  is  solid  truth.  The  truth  is  expressed 
elsewhere  under  the  figure  of  a  new  birth.  "  Except 
a  man  be  born  anew,  or  from  above,"  said  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  "he  cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  God." 
He  must  be  born  of  water  and  the  Spirit.  This,  in 
the  language  of  St.  John,  is  to  be  born  of  God.  We  are 
saved,  says  St.  Paul,  through  the  laver  of  regeneration, 
and  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost.^ 

The  new  birth,  or  regeneration,  is  thus  in  a  measure 
identified  with  justification,  but  there  is  an  important 
distinction.  The  grace  of  justification  is  many  times 
renewed :  regeneration  is  a  gift  of  life  once  for  all. 
However  often  a  man  fall  by  deadly  sin  from  the  state  of 
salvation,  he  may  be  restored  by  a  fresh  act  of  justifying 

'  Rom.  vi.  l-li  ;  John  iii.  3,  S  ;  I  John  iii.  9,  et  alibi ; 
Titus  iii.  5. 


Eternal  Life  179 

grace  ;  but  this  restoration  is  not  described  in  the  terms 
of  death  and  birth  which  are  used  of  the  original 
justification. 

We  must  carefully  observe  how  death  is  spoken  of  in 
this  connection.  The  word  is  used  in  two  ways  which, 
on  the  surface,  are  contradictory.  It  is  used  to  signify 
the  effect  of  sin,  not  only  as  a  future  consequence,  but  as 
present  even  now  in  those  who  yet  live  in  the  flesh. 
"  Ye  were  dead,"  says  St.  Paul,  "  through  your  trespasses 
and  sins,  wherein  aforetime  ye  walked."  "  He  that  loveth 
not,"  says  St.  John,  "  abideth  in  death."  It  is  needless  to 
multiply  examples.  On  the  other  hand  the  way  of  escape 
out  of  this  state  of  death  is  itself  called  death.  "  Ye 
died,"  says  St.  Paul  to  the  Colossians,  "  and  your  life  is 
hid  with  Christ  in  God."  "  We  who  died  to  sin,"  he 
asks,  "  how  shall  we  any  longer  live  therein?  "  We  died 
with  Christ ;  we  were  made  dead  to  the  Law  through 
the  body  of  Christ.  It  was  thus  by  death  that  we  passed 
into  a  new  life.  But  yet  again  there  may  be  a  return 
from  this  new  life  into  the  former  state  of  death.  There 
is  a  sin  unto  death,  says  St.  John,  which  a  brother,  a 
member  of  the  redeemed  and  sanctified  company,  may 
sin.  This  may  be  what  is  spoken  of  in  the  Apocalypse 
as  the  second  death;  it  is  certainly  what  is  meant  by 
St.  Jude  where  he  speaks  of  autumn  trees  without  fruit, 
twice  dead,  plucked  up  by  the  roots.-' 

From  this  second  death  no  possibility  of  revival  is 
anywhere  suggested.  In  the  third  century  there  appeared 
a  hard  and  fierce  doctrine,  prompted  perhaps  by  growing 
laxity  among  Christians,  according  to  which  any  single 
grievous  sin  committed  after  baptism  brought  the  soul 
into  this  death.     N  ovatian  of  Rome  taught  thus,  forming 

'  Eph.  ii.  I  ;  I  John  iii.  14;  Col.  iii.  3  ;  Rom.  vi.  2,  8  ;  vii.  4; 
I  John  V.  16  ;  Rev.  xx.  6  ;  Jude  12. 


i8o        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

a  schism  which  long  continued  ;  but  the  general  Christian 
tradition  held  fast  to  the  hoi^e  of  pardon  and  restoration 
for  the  fallen.  In  the  language  of  the  Church  deadly 
sin  is  not  a  sin  which  plunges  the  soul  at  once  into  death, 
but  one  which,  if  continued  without  repentance,  will 
certainly  have  that  effect/  The  remedy  for  such  sin  is 
the  grace  of  justification,  regarded  not  as  giving  new 
life  but  as  arresting  the  approach  of  death.  The  sinner 
has  fallen  from  the  state  of  salvation  which  is  spiritual 
health ;  he  is  restored,  not  to  a  new  life,  but  to  the  use 
and  enjoyment  of  the  life  which  was  in  danger.  In  one 
difficult  passage  St,  John  seems  to  speak  of  this  restora- 
tion as  a  gift  of  life.  "  If  any  man  see  his  brother 
sinning  a  sin  not  unto  death,  he  shall  ask  and  shall  give 
him  life."  ^  But  this  may  well  be  understood  of  extension 
or  continuation  of  a  threatened  life.  Nowhere  is  the 
repentance  of  a  Christian  spoken  of  as  a  passage  through 
death  into  life.  St.  Paul  desired  to  become  conformed 
to  the  death  of  Christ ;  but  this  was  a  continuance,  not  a 
renewal,  of  the  mystical  death  by  which  he  attained  the 
new  life.  The  life  itself  is  necrosis^  mortification.  Because 
we  died,  and  our  life  is  hid  with  Christ  in  God,  there- 
fore we  are  to  mortify  our  members  which  are  upon  the 
earth.  St.  Paul  would  bear  about  in  his  body  the 
dying  of  Jesus,  that  the  life  also  of  Jesus  might  be 
manifested  in  his  body.     Such  dying  is  not  for  renewal 

'  To  use  the  words  of  St.  Cyprian,  death  creeps  on  by  reason  of 
such  sin.  Penitence  Uberates  "  non  utique  ab  ilia  morte  quam 
semel  Christi  sangius  extinxit,  et  a  qua  nos  salutaris  baptismi  et 
redemptoris  nostri  gratia  liberavit,  sed  ab  ea  quae  per  delicta  post- 
modum  serpit"  (Epist.,  Iv.  22). 

*  I  John  V.  16.  There  is  no  ground  for  the  insertion  "  God  shall 
give  him."  The  Vulgate  rendering  turns  the  difficulty  by  using  the 
passive  ;  "  petat,  et  dabitur  ei  vita." 


Eternal  Life  i8i 

by  penitence ;  it  is  the  law  of  continuous  advance  in 
sanctification.^ 

We  may  now  see  the  meaning  of  the  difficult  passage 
in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  :  "  As  touching  those  who 
were  once  enlightened  .  .  .  and  then  fell  away,  it  is 
impossible  to  renew  them  again  unto  repentance,  openly 
crucifying  to  themselves  the  Son  of  God  afresh."  For 
those  who  have  once  been  admitted  to  the  life  of  grace 
there  can  be  no  fresh  beginning.  They  were  once 
crucified  with  Christ,  openly  brought  into  union  with 
his  death,  and  so  into  the  light  and  the  gifts  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  the  powers  of  the  age  to  come.  If  they 
fall  back,  repentance  is  not  indeed  denied  them  with  its 
effect  of  restoration,  but  there  is  no  complete  renewal, 
no  repetition  of  the  death  unto  sin  or  of  the  new  birth 
unto  righteousness.  It  is  a  powerful  exhortation  to 
continuance  and  progress  in  the  way  of  salvation.  We 
cannot  be  ever  beginning  afresh  ;  we  must  go  on  to 
perfection.^ 

There  is  then  a  definite  beginning  of  justification, 
which  cannot  be  repeated.  It  is  a  new  birth,  and  there- 
fore the  beginning  of  a  new  life.  It  is  the  beginning- 
only,  and  from  that  beginning  there  is  to  be  an  advance. 
We  are  to  grow  in  grace.  We  are  not  to  remain 
children,  but  are  to  become  as  full-grown  men,  attaining 
to  the  measure  of  the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ.^ 

Life  is  an  assemblage  of  powers.  These  may  be 
possessed  before  they  can  be   exercised.     It   is    so  in 

'  Phil.  iii.  lo ;  Col.  iii.  3-5,  veKpdcrare  ;  2  Cor.  iv.  lO,  viKpuffiv  ; 
cf.  Rom.  viii.  13,  davarovn.  These  three  words  are  found  no- 
where else  in  this  sense,  until  they  came  into  common  use  among 
Christians  by  direct  derivation  from  St.  Paul. 

'^  Heb.  vi.  4-6.    See  Note  F. 

'  2  Pet.  iii.  18;  Eph.  iv.  13,  14. 


1 82        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

nature.  The  human  child  is  born  with  capacities  which 
are  developed  with  bodily  growth.  It  is  so  in  grace. 
Powers  are  given  to  the  soul  to  be  gradually  brought 
into  use.  Their  development  does  not  depend  upon 
natural  growth.  It  is  true  that  without  a  certain  measure 
of  his  proper  animal  growth  man  remains  incapable  of 
exercising  his  spiritual  faculties  ;  but_  the  faculties  im- 
planted by  the  grace  of  the  new  birth  have  a  proper 
growth  of  their  own,  which  depends  on  the  continual 
supply  of  grace  upon  grace. 

From  the  time  of  Aristotle  the  Greek  mind  was 
familiar  with  the  antithesis  of  power  and  energy,  the 
potential  and  the  actual.  The  metaphysical  terms  passed 
into  the  common  language,  losing,  as  usual,  something 
of  their  sharpness  in  the  transit,  but  retaining  a  flavour 
of  the  technical  sense.  In  delivering  his  message,  St. 
Paul  makes  use  of  these  terms,  more  specially  and  more 
precisely  in  the  Epistles  to  the  Ephesians  and  the 
Colossians,  where  he  is  dealing  with  vagaries  of  Greek 
thought,  but  elsewhere  as  well.'  He  presents  the  Christian 
life  as  a  potentiality  imparted  by  grace,  which  is  energized 
or  rendered  actual  by  the  continued  operation  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  the  persevering  response  of  the  human 
heart.  This  answers  very  well  to  the  conception  of  new 
birth,  for  life  in  the  newly  begotten  is  an  assemblage  of 
powers  not  yet  actualized. 

Another  figure  of  the  new  life  demands  attention.  "  I 
am  the  Vine,"  said  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  "  ye  are  the 

'  Eph.  i.  19;  ii.  2;  iii.  7,  20;  iv.  16;  Col.  i.  29;  ii.  12.  But 
compare  i  Cor.  xii.  6,  10,  il;  Gal.  iii.  5  ;  v.  6  ;  Phil.  iii.  21. 
The  words  appear  to  be  used  more  generally  in  Rom.  vii.  5  ;  2  Cor. 
i.  6  ;  iv.  12  ;  while  in  Gal.  ii.  8 ;  i  Thess.  ii.  13,  and  2  Thess.  ii. 
9-1 1,  eVepyeia  and  ivepyelv  are  probably  to  be  taken  in  a  purely 
popular  sense. 


Eternal  Life  183 

branches ;  he  that  abideth  in  me,  and  I  in  him,  the  same 
beareth  much  fruit :  for  apart  from  me  ye  can  do  nothing. 
If  a  man  abide  not  in  me,  he  is  cast  forth  as  a  branch  and 
withered."  The  figure  is  taken  up  with  variation  by  St. 
Paul,  who  speaks  of  the  converted  Gentiles  as  branches  of 
wild  olive  engrafted  in  a  good  olive  tree,  and  partaking  of 
the  root  of  its  fatness.  The  new  powers  of  fruit-bearing 
superadded  to  the  natural  life  of  the  wild  olive  represent 
the  powers  of  the  life  of  grace  superadded  to  the  natural 
powers  of  humanity.^ 

"  God  gave  unto  us  eternal  life,"  says  St,  John,  "  and 
this  Ufe  is  in  his  Son,  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  the 
life;  he  that  hath  not  the  Son  hath  not  the  life."  In 
abundance  of  figures  we  are  taught  that  the  life  of 
Christ  himself  is  in  some  sort  communicated  to  us. 
St.  Peter  uses  even  bolder  language.  We  are  made 
partakers  of  the  Divine  nature ;  to  have  the  Son  of  God 
means  nothing  less  than  this.  We  have  the  mind  of 
Christ,  says  St.  Paul.  Herein  is  the  nature  of  the  new 
life.  The  powers  of  which  it  is  the  assemblage  are 
summed  up  as  the  capacity  of  knowing  God.  "  This  is 
life  eternal,"  said  the  Lord,  "  that  they  should  know  thee, 
the  only  true  God,  and  him  whom  thou  didst  send,  even 
Jesus  Christ."  His  Divine  power,  says  St.  Peter  again, 
has  granted  unto  us  all  things  that  pertain  unto  life  and 
godliness,  through  the  knowledge  of  him  that  called  us. 
Knowledge  and  love,  according  to  St.  John,  are  twin 
powers  of  this  life,  and  hardly  distinguishable.  "  Every 
one  that  loveth  is  begotten  of  God,  and  knoweth  God. 
He  that  loveth  not  knoweth  not  God,  for  God  is  love." 
The  spirit  of  the  new  life  is  the  spirit  of  truth.  "  The 
natural  man,"  says  St.  Paul,  "  receiveth  not  the  things  of 
the  Spirit  of  God  :  for  they  are  foolishness  unto  him ; 
'  John  XV.  5,  6  ;  Rom.  xi.  17-24, 


184        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

and  he  cannot  know  them,  because  they  are  spiritually 
judged.  But  he  that  is  spiritual  judgeth  all  things,  and 
he  himself  is  judged  of  no  man.  For  who  hath  known 
the  mind  of  the  Lord,  that  he  should  instruct  him  ?  But 
we  have  the  mind  of  Christ."  ^ 

Regeneration  is  the  gift  of  this  power  or  capacity  of 
knowing  God,  which  is  to  be  energized  in  the  Christian 
life  now  and  hereafter.  It  is  a  power  transcending  that 
natural  capacity  for  knowing  the  existence  of  God  which 
is  the  foundation  of  natural  religion.  It  is  called  spiritual 
because  they  who  possess  it  are  raised  by  the  power  of 
the  Spirit  of  God  to  a  higher  intellectual  perception.  The 
life  resulting  is  therefore  called,  though  not  expressly  so 
in  Holy  Scripture,  spiritual  life.  It  is  called  also  life 
eternal.  The  word,  so  used,  is  obviously  to  be  taken  in 
a  sense  differing  somewhat  from  that  in  which  we  speak 
of  the  eternity  of  God — unbeginning  and  changeless 
existence.  The  life  that  is  given  us  had  a  beginning  in 
the  gift ;  it  can  be  lost ;  but  it  participates  in  eternity,  as 
St.  Thomas  Aquinas  puts  it,"  because  of  the  possibility  of 
immutable  continuance.  It  has  no  natural  term.  It  may 
be  violently  cut  off,  but  in  its  own  nature  it  is  everlasting. 
Unlike  our  animal  life  it  has  in  it  no  seed  of  corruption. 
"  Whosoever  is  begotten  of  God  sinneth  not,"  says  St. 
John  ;  and  yet  we,  who  are  now  children  of  God,  if  we 
say  that  we  have  no  sin,  deceive  ourselves.  We  have 
the  two  lives  :  the  one  after  the  flesh,  in  which  the  effect 
of  sin  still  abides  ;  the  other  after  the  Spirit,  which  shares 
in  the  sinlessness  of  eternity.^ 

'  John  xvii.  3  ;  i  Cor.  ii.  14-16  ;  2  Pet.  i.  3,  4  ;  i  John  iv.  7,  8 ; 
V.  II.  I  quote  2  Peter  without  intending  .my  judgment  as  to  its 
source.     See  Note  C. 

^  Sum.  Tkeol.,  i.  10.  3. 

^  I  John  i.  8  ;  iii.  2  ;  v.  18. 


Eternal  Life  185 

\Vith  this  gift  of  spiritual  and  eternal  life  is  intimately 
associated  the  doctrine  of  the  Resurrection.  Man's 
immortality  and  the  eternal  judgment  of  God  are  truths 
of  natural  religion  which  are  rather  assumed  than  revealed 
-in  the  gospel,  and  we  cannot  even  say  that  much  light  is 
thrown  upon  them.  The  judgment  is  continually  insisted 
upon  as  a  tremendous  fact.  What  we  become  in  this  life 
by  the  use  or  abuse  of  God's  grace,  that  we  must  con- 
tinue to  be  eternally.  The  truth  is  impressed  by  awful 
description ;  the  searching  nature  of  the  inquisition, 
the  rending  of  all  veils  of  self-deceit,  the  trying  and 
purifying  flame,  the  fire  and  the  worm  of  punishment, 
are  brought  into  the  picture ;  but  the  time  and  the 
manner  of  the  judgment  remain  obscure.  Purely 
temporal  judgments,  such  as  the  ruin  of  Jerusalem,  are 
purposely  combined  in  prophetic  descri])tion  with  the  final 
judgment  of  the  world,  and  this  again  with  the  trial  of 
individual  souls.  The  ignorance  of  the  day  and  hour 
which  the  Incarnate  Son  professed  is  characteristic  of 
authentic  Christian  teaching  on  the  subject. 

The  doctrine  of  the  Resurrection,  put  in  the  forefront 
of  their  teaching  by  the  Apostles,  adds  this  to  the  already 
accepted  idea  of  immortality,  that  we  look  forward  not 
only  to  conscious  existence  after  death,  but  also  to  the 
full  restoration  of  our  whole  nature,  body  and  soul.  The 
body  which  is  the  instrument  of  the  soul  will  be  laid 
aside  in  death,  but  resumed,  with  what  change  of  material 
circumstance  we  know  not,  in  the  consummation  of  all 
things.  The  appearances  of  our  Blessed  Lord  after  his 
resurrection  were  so  obviously  adapted  to  the  needs  of 
those  whom  he  visited,  that  we  cannot  safely  argue  from 
them  to  the  constitution  of  the  resurrection  body.  It  is 
a  glorious  body,  says  St.  Paul,  and  a  spiritual  body, 
as   contrasted  with  the  animal  body  that   now   is,   the 


1 86        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

body  of  our  humiliation.  More  definite  knowledge  is 
denied  v&} 

It  is  clear  that  in  the  beginning  of  their  teaching  the 
Apostles  were  expecting  a  speedy  return  of  the  Lord  and 
the  end  of  this  world.  This  eager  expectation,  coupled 
with  the  doctrine  of  the  death  unto  sin  and  the  new  life, 
seems  to  have  led  some  men  to  suppose  that  nothing  else 
was  meant  by  judgment  and  resurrection  but  the  approval 
of  converts  and  the  grace  of  regeneration.  Early  in  his 
teaching  St.  Paul  had  occasion  to  correct  the  idea  that 
the  Day  of  the  Lord  was  already  come.  Soon  afterwards 
he  had  to  impress  on  the  Corinthians  the  literal  reality  of 
the  bodily  resurrection.  At  the  very  end  of  his  course 
he  had  to  condemn  certain  who  said  that  the  resurrec- 
tion was  past  already,  which  was  to  overthrow  the  faith. 
There  was  an  obvious  danger  to  Christian  morality  in 
such  teaching,  which  made  the  condemnation  the  more 
necessary.'-^ 

The  resurrection  of  the  flesh,  though  intimately 
associated  in  doctrine  with  the  new  life,  is  not  to  be 
thought  of  as  a  consequence  of  it.  There  are  sayings 
that  seem  to  imply  as  much.  "  If  the  Spirit  of  him  that 
raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dead  dwelleth  in  you,"  says  St. 
Paul,  "he  that  raised  up  Christ  Jesus  from  the  dead 
shall  quicken  also  your  mortal  bodies,  through  his  Spirit 
that  dwelleth  in  you."  But  to  read  this  in  such  a  sense 
would  be  to  contradict  the  patent  teaching  of  other 
passages,  where  the  resurrection  is  spoken  of  as  general. 
It  seems  to  be  the  will  of  God,  irrespective  of  redemption, 
that  the  human  soul  should  not  be  permanently  deprived 
of  its  natural  organ  the  body.  In  one  of  our  Lord's 
obscure  sayings  about  the  future  of  the  saved  and  the 

'   I  Cor.  XV.  44  ;  Phil.  iii.  2i. 

*  2  Thess.  ii.  2  ;  i  Cor.  xv.  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  l8. 


Eternal  Life  187 

lost  he  speaks  of  soul  and  body  alike  being  destroyed 
in  Gehenna.' 

The  grace  of  eternal  life  is  connected  with  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  body,  as  ensuring  to  the  reunited  soul  and 
body  the  possession  of  life  in  the  highest  sense.  Eternal 
life,  the  power  of  knowing  God,  is  even  now  given  to  the 
soul ;  but  the  body  remains  subject  to  death.  The  body 
of  the  saint  will  rise  again  a  spiritual  body,  sharing  in  the 
powers  of  the  spiritual  life.  The  whole  man,  body  and 
soul,  will  enter  into  possession  of  the  vision  of  God, 
which  is  the  first  and  supreme  beatitude.  For  this 
reason  eternal  life,  which  is  sometimes  said  to  be  already 
granted,  is  at  other  times  spoken  of  as  a  gift  belonging  to 
the  world  to  come.  Not  until  the  resurrection  can  the 
saints  enter  upon  its  fulness.  The  consummation  of 
eternal  life  is  the  unalterable  joy  of  body  and  soul  in  the 
vision  of  God.  Its  correlative,  eternal  death,  is  unchang- 
ing banishment  of  body  and  soul,  eternal  destruction 
from  the  face  of  the  Lord  and  from  the  glory  of  his 
might.  2 

Concerning  the  state  of  the  separated  soul  between 
death  and  resurrection  little  is  revealed.  St.  Paul  knew 
that  for  him  to  be  absent  from  the  body  was  to  be  at 
home  with  the  Lord.  He  had  the  desire  to  depart  and 
be  with  Christ.  When  he  had  finished  his  course  and 
the  time  of  his  departure  was  come,  he  spoke  of  a  crown 
of  righteousness  thenceforth  laid  up  for  him  which  the 
Lord  should  give  him  at  that  day.  The  expression 
commonly  refers  to  the  coming  of  the  Lord  and  the  final 
judgment.  It  may  refer  here  to  the  particular  judgment 
at  the  hour  of  death;    but  more  probably  St.   Paul  is 

'  Rom.  viii.  II  ;  Matt.  x.  28.  Destruction  is  not  to  be  confounded 
with  annihilation. 

-  Matt.  XXV.  46  ;  Mark  x.  30;  Rom,  ii.  7  ;  i  Thess.  i.  9. 


1 88        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

speaking  of  final  entry  upon  the  perfect  state  of  glory  at 
the  resurrection,  and  contemplates  in  the  mean  time  the 
blissful  unalterable  assurance  of  that  which  is  in  store  for 
him.'  A  particular  judgment  at  the  hour  of  death  is 
clearly  indicated,  since  the  righteous  are  adjudged  worthy 
of  admission  to  the  presence  of  the  Lord.  On  this  judg- 
ment will  depend  the  reward  which  each  man  shall 
receive  according  to  his  own  labour.  The  work  will  be 
made  manifest,  revealed  in  fire ;  the  fire  itself  shall  prove 
each  man's  work  of  what  sort  it  is.  That  which  is  built 
on  a  sure  foundation  will  stand,  even  if  it  include  some 
wood,  hay,  and  stubble.  These  defects  will  be  cleared 
away  by  the  searching,  purging  fire,  not  without  suffering ; 
but  the  rest  will  stand.  "  If  any  man's  work  shall  abide 
which  he  built  thereon,  he  shall  receive  a  reward.  If 
any  man's  work  shall  be  burned,  he  shall  suffer  loss  :  but 
he  himself  shall  be  saved ;  yet  so  as  through  fire."  - 

In  this  figure  St.  Paul  clearly  teaches  that  a  soul  which 
has  received  and  retained  the  grace  of  eternal  life  will 
pass  through  a  fiery  trial  of  suffering.  This  will  at  once 
test  and  purify  the  work  which  the  soul  has  done.  If  the 
work  be  all  sound  and  pure,  if  the  soul  be  already  before 
death  throughly  purged  from  all  earthly  dross,  it  will  pass 
through  the  fire  scatheless.  If  any  admixture  of  evil 
remain,  the  fire  must  purge  it.  The  soul  in  either  case 
lives  on  with  the  life  of  grace,  and  when  throughly 
purged  receives  the  reward,  which  will  after  the  resurrec- 
tion be  shared  also  by  the  glorified  body.  Theologians 
have  debated  whether  the  saints  already  before  the 
resurrection  have  the  beatific  vision  of  God.  The  over- 
whelming weight  of  opinion  is  for  the  affirmative,  but  it 
remains  opinion  ;  what  is  certain  is  that  the  souls  of  the 

'  2  Cor.  V.  8  ;  Phil.  i.  23  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  8. 
-  I  Cor.  iii.  8-15.     See  Note  G. 


Eternal  Life  189 

perfected  saints  are  at  home  with  the  Lord.  St.  Peter 
passed  by  martyrdom,  says  St.  Clement,  into  the  place  of 
glory  that  was  his  due.^ 

Concerning  souls  that  have  not  received  or  have  lost  the 
grace  of  eternal  life  still  less  is  revealed.  We  may  doubt 
whether  our  Lord,  in  using  for  the  parable  of  the  rich  man 
and  Lazarus  the  opinions  and  the  figures  current  among 
the  Jews,  intended  to  convey  any  formal  teaching  on  the 
subject.  At  the  same  time  we  must  be  assured  that  if 
these  opinions  had  involved  any  serious  falsehood  he 
would  not  have  so  used  them.  In  the  parable  we  see 
the  souls  of  the  lost  in  hell,  the  place  of  the  dead, 
tormented  in  flame  and  denied  all  hope  of  escaping  into 
rest  and  felicity.  Concerning  this  fire  of  hell  two 
opinions  have  held  ground  in  the  Church.  The  one 
opinion,  which  prevails  in  Eastern  Christendom,  identifies 
it  with  the  searching  and  purifying  fire  to  which  the  souls 
of  the  saved  are  subject.  These  can  pass  through  it, 
with  whatever  loss  and  suffering,  into  the  place  of  joy. 
The  lost  will  remain  therein,  even  to  the  resurrection  and 
beyond.^  The  other  opinion,  general  in  the  West,  is 
that  from  the  hour  of  death  the  souls  of  the  lost  and  the 
souls  that  are  to  be  saved  as  through  fire  are  segregated 
into  several  places ;  those  pass  into  hell,  these  to  a 
purging  fire  through  which  they  attain  to  Paradise  and 
the  state  of  beatitude.  It  is  obvious  that  when  we  speak 
of  place  in  relation  to  the  separated  soul,  we  are 
accommodating  our  language  to  the  conditions  of 
corporeal  existence.  Such  accommodation  is  unavoid- 
able if  we  are  to  speak  of  these  things  at  all,  and  it  has 

'  Clem.,  Ad  Cor.  v.  :  ei's  t))v  6(peLX6fifuou  rdTrov ttj s  So^rt^. 

-  Such  is  the  teaching  of  the  Council  of  Bethlehem,  c.  xviii.  The 
Russian  Catechism  is  less  explicit.  See  Blackmore,  Doctrine  of  the 
Russian  Church,  pp.  98,  seqcj. 


190        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

the  sanction  of  Scripture.  The  general  belief  about 
Purgatory,  though  defaced  by  gross  imaginings,  rests  on 
a  true  basis  of  revelation.  Through  a  fiery  trial,  testing 
and  purging  their  work,  the  souls  of  faithful  but  faulty 
Christians  pass  into  the  fruition  of  eternal  life. 


CHAPTER    IV 

CONCERNING   THE    CHURCH 

Sect.  I. — The  Christian  Society 

The  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Saviour  of  the  world. 
Of  the  meaning  of  this  there  can  be  no  doubt.  Those 
who  need  a  Saviour  are  those  who  are  ruined  by  sin,  and 
under  this  head  comes  the  whole  human  race.  He  is  the 
Saviour  of  all  men,  specially  of  them  that  believe.^  He 
is  the  Saviour  of  all  men  potentially  and  in  purpose,  since 
he  died  for  all ;  he  is  the  Saviour  of  believers  actually  and 
with  effect.  But  not  individual  souls  alone  are  saved, 
for  that  would  not  be  the  saving  of  the  world.  As  we 
have  seen  above,  man  is  by  nature  a  social  being ;  he 
is  what  he  is,  and  still  more  he  is  potentially  what  he 
may  become,  by  reason  of  his  place  in  human  society; 
apart  from  society,  if  he  can  be  conceived  as  so  existing 
at  all,  he  would  be  other  than  he  is,  other  than  he  was 
designed  to  be  by  the  Creator.  The  social  order  of 
mankind  is  no  less  disturbed  and  ruined  by  sin  than 
are  the  lives  of  individual  sinners,  and  this  also  needs 
restoration.  The  saving  of  the  world  is  the  healing  of 
the  social  order. 

The  end  of  this   saving   work    is  spoken    of  as   the 
creation  of  a    new  heaven  and   a   new   earth  wherein 
'   I  Tim.  iv.  lo. 

191 


192        The  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctritie 

dwelleth  righteousness.  It  was  promised  in  prophecy, 
looked  for  in  the  apostoHc  age,  seen  in  the  apocalyptic 
vision  of  St,  John.  It  was  figured  in  the  same  vision 
as  the  Holy  City,  the  new  Jerusalem,  coming  down 
from  God  out  of  heaven.  Here  it  is  a  thing  future, 
beheld  in  finished  completeness.  In  like  manner,  as  we 
have  seen,  eternal  life  is  spoken  of  as  perfect  in  the 
future,  but  at  the  same  time  as  given  to  us  now  in 
possession.  So  too  the  Holy  City  is  a  present  reality. 
Jerusalem  that  is  above  is  our  mother,  says  St.  Paul. 
Our  commonwealth  is  in  heaven,  he  tells  the  Philippians, 
and  he  bids  them  live  the  common  life  in  a  manner 
worthy  of  the  gospel  of  Christ.  They  are  themselves 
individually  new  creatures  in  Christ,  and  they  are  taken 
up  into  a  new  social  order.  The  same  truth  is  eloquently 
expressed  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  :  "  Ye  are  come 
unto  mount  Zion,  and  unto  the  city  of  the  living  God, 
the  heavenly  Jerusalem,  and  to  innumerable  hosts  of 
angels,  to  the  general  assembly  and  church  of  the  first- 
born who  are  enrolled  in  heaven."  Our  state  is  not  yet 
perfect :  "  We  have  not  here  an  abiding  city,  but  we  seek 
after  the  city  which  is  to  come."  Yet  even  now  we  are 
of  the  commonwealth  of  Israel,  fellow-citizens  with  the 
saints  and  of  the  household  of  God.^ 

The  word  which  became  the  fixed  expression  of  this 
new  social  order  is  used  in  the  above  quotation  from  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews — the  Greek  word  Ecclesia.  It  has 
passed  through  the  Latin  to  most  languages  of  Western 
Europe,  but  we  render  it  in  English  by  the  word  Church. 
To  ascertain   its  meaning   we  must  keep  close  to  the 

'  Isa.  Ixv.  17  ;  Ixvi.  22  ;  2  Pet.  iii.  13  ;  Rev.  xxi.  i,  2 ;  Gal.  iv.  26  ; 
Phil.  iii.  20  ;  i.  27  (where  for  the  force  of  iro\iTevfia  aiid  iroXiTevfadf 
see  the  margin  of  the  Revised  Version)  ;  2  Cor.  v.  17;  Heb.  xii.  22  ; 
xiii.  14  ;  Eph.  ii.  12,  19. 


The  Christian   Society'  193 

original,  and  see  how  it  was  used  in  the  first  deUvery  of 
the  gospel. 

At  the  time  when  the  Greek  language  took  its  lasting 
form  the  word  Ecdesia  meant  the  legal  assembly  of 
citizens  in  a  free  commonwealth.  The  figure  of  a 
commonweath  is  used,  as  we  have  seen,  by  St.  Paul ;  but 
we  are  not  to  seek  here  the  origin  of  the  term ;  rather, 
we  may  say,  the  use  of  the  term  suggested  the  figure. 
The  New  Testament  word  Ecdesia  is  drawn  immediately 
from  the  Greek  rendering  of  the  Old  Testament.  It  is 
there  the  equivalent  of  two  Hebrew  words,  the  one  signi- 
fying properly  the  whole  nation  of  Israel  regarded  as  an 
organized  society,  the  other  meaning  strictly  the  assembly 
of  the  heads  of  the  nation.  The  former  word  went 
gradually  out  of  use,  and  the  latter  was  used  in  both 
senses.  The  Greek  word  representing  it  "  would 
naturally,"  says  Dr.  Hort,  "  for  Greek-speaking  Jews 
mean  the  congregation  of  Israel  quite  as  much  as  an 
assembly  of  the  congregation."  It  was  a  term  of  distinctly 
social  import ;  as  Dr.  Hort  says  again,  it  "  suggested  no 
mere  agglomeration  of  men,  but  rather  a  unity  carried 
out  in  the  joint  action  of  many  members,  each  having 
his  own  responsibilities,  the  action  of  each  and  all  being 
regulated  by  a  supreme  law  or  order."  ' 

With  its  meaning  thus  fixed,  the  word  passed  into  the 
New  Testament.  It  is  found  only  twice  in  the  Gospels : 
both   places  are  in  St.  Matthew,  and  both  are  critical. 

•  Iloit,  The  Christian  Ecdesia,  ch.  i.  pp.  7,  15.  The  Hebrew 
words  are  edhdh  and  qdhdl,  distinguished  in  the  Revised  English 
Version  by  the  words  congregation  and  assembly.  An  alternative 
rendering,  much  the  more  common  for  edhdh,  is  awayuiy^)^  which 
in  the  course  of  time  shifted  its  significance,  and  came  to  be  used 
almost  exclusively,  as  we  see  it  in  the  New  Testament,  of  a  mere 
local  assembly. 

O 


194        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

The  chronological  order  of  the  narrative  is  so  uncertain 
that  we  cannot  build  anything  on  the  priority  of  occasion, 
but  we  may  take  the  passages  as  they  stand.  The  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  having  drawn  from  St.  Peter  the  confession, 
"  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God,"  pro- 
nounced a  blessing  on  him,  and  continued :  "  I  also  say 
unto  thee,  that  thou  art  Peter  {Fcfros),  and  upon  this  rock 
(pefra)  I  will  build  my  Church  ;  and  the  gates  of  hell 
shall  not  prevail  against  it.  I  will  give  unto  thee  the 
keys  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  :  and  whatsoever  thou 
shalt  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  Heaven  :  and 
whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in 
Heaven."  ^  Here  the  Lord  speaks  of  the  establishment 
of  the  Church  in  the  near  future.  He  will  build  it ;  a 
figure  of  speech  frequently  used  in  the  Old  Testament 
in  respect  of  the  congregation  of  Israel.  He  gives  it  the 
familiar  name  designating  that  congregation,  but  at  the 
same  time  he  calls  it  My  Church.  He  points  at  once 
to  the  old  and  to  the  new ;  to  the  old  order  remaining 
and  yet  made  new,  as  always  in  the  work  of  redemption 
and  salvation. 

In  the  other  place  where  the  word  is  found  the  Lord 
is  laying  down  a  rule  of  social  order  for  dealing  with  an 
erring  member  of  society.  "  If  thy  brother  sin  against 
thee,  go,  show  him  his  fault  between  thee  and  him  alone  : 
if  he  hear  thee,  thou  hast  gained  thy  brother.  But  if  he 
hear  thee  not,  take  with  thee  one  or  two  more,  that  at 

'  MaU.  xvi.  i8,  19.  It  has  been  acutely  suggested  that  our 
Lord  may  have  said,  in  accordance  with  his  usual  diction,  r^v 
^affiKiiav  /j-ov,  for  which  the  evangelist  has  substituted  the  latterly 
more  significant  word  iKKX-qalav,  in  the  same  sense ;  but  Ilort  will 
not  hear  of  any  doubt  about  the  text  {C/ir.  Eccl.,  p.  9).  The 
constant  use  of  the  word  in  the  apostolic  writings  from  the  first 
would  be  unintelligible  if  the  Lord  had  never  used  it  himself. 


TJie  Christian  Society  195 

the  mouth  of  two  witnesses  or  three  every  word  may  be 
estabUshed.  And  if  he  refuse  to  hear  them,  tell  it  unto 
the  Church  :  and  if  he  refuse  to  hear  the  Church  also, 
let  him  be  unto  thee  as  the  Gentile  and  the  publican. 
Verily  I  say  unto  you,  What  things  soever  ye  shall  bind 
on  earth  shall  be  bound  in  Heaven  :  and  w^hat  things  so- 
ever ye  shall  loose  on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  Heaven."  ^ 
The  Church  is  here  spoken  of  as  already  established. 
The  direction  has  been  thought  to  refer  to  the  existing 
constitution  of  the  Jewish  Church  in  local  organized 
communities  or  synagogues.  The  language  used  is 
proper  to  them ;  the  Gentile  and  the  publican  were  those 
alien  from  them,  and  kept  severely  apart ;  a  man  cast 
out  of  the  synagogue  was  reduced  to  their  condition.  But 
even  if  there  be  a  reference  to  this  existing  social  order 
the  instruction  goes  farther.  It  is  general ;  it  is  for  the 
Lord's  own  disciples ;  it  denotes  the  continuance  of  the 
old  order  under  new  conditions  and  with  new  powers. 
The  commission  to  bind  and  loose,  connected  on  the 
other  occasion  with  the  future  building  of  the  Church  of 
Christ,  is  repeated  in  this  connection.  The  meaning  of 
the  commission  we  shall  consider  when  dealing  with  the 
Ministry  of  the  Church ;  it  is  sufficient  to  say  here  that 
to  those  who  heard  the  words  they  would  convey  no 
meaning  but  that  of  legislative  and  judicial  powers 
ordained  in  a  constituted  society ;  and  these  powers  the 
Lord  confirmed  to  his  disciples  in  the  Church.  But  his 
disciples  had  no  such  powers  in  the  synagogue  :  the 
Church  here  spoken  of  is  that  society  in  which  they  were 
to  exercise  the  ruling  office. 

It   would   be   foolish   to   suppose  that   on  these   two 
occasions  only  was  the  word  used  by  the  Lord.     It  is 
familiar  from  the  first  in  the  apostolic  teaching,  and  we 
'  Matt,  xviii.  15-18. 


196        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

find  it  used  constantly  in  the  sense  already  fixed.  The 
Church  of  the  Old  Testament  was  God's  chosen  people, 
called  out  of  Egypt  and  redeemed  from  bondage,  endowed 
by  the  Divine  providence  with  promised  gifts  and  guarded 
as  a  peculiar  treasure.  The  Church  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  described  in  the  same  terms  with  a  difference. 
It  is  a  chosen  people,  not  of  one  nation  only  but 
gathered  out  of  all  nations,  redeemed  from  sin,  called 
to  be  saints,  endowed  with  the  riches  of  Divine  grace, 
cherished  by  the  Lord  as  a  man  cares  for  his  own  body. 
It  is  not  wholly  new ;  there  is  a  remnant  of  the  old 
according  to  the  election  of  grace  \  the  casting  away  of 
the  rest  is  the  reconciling  of  the  world.  Former  branches 
of  the  olive  tree  were  broken  off  that  the  new  might 
be  grafted  in,  but  the  tree  remains  the  same.  So  the 
Church  of  the  Old  Testament  is  continued  with  a  differ- 
ence in  the  Church  of  the  New  Testament.^ 

The  Election  of  Grace  holds  an  important  position  in 
Christian  doctrine.  It  is  closely  connected  with  the 
idea  of  ca/iiiig.  In  one  of  our  Lord's  parables  the  called 
and  the  elect  are  sharply  sundered,  and  we  are  told  that 
of  many  called  few  are  chosen.  By  the  calling  is  here 
meant  God's  invitation,  through  the  preaching  of  the 
gospel,  to  the  salvation  which  is  by  Christ ;  the  elect 
are  those  who  answer  the  call  and  are  found  worthy.^ 
But  elsewhere  the  words  are  not  so  distinguished.  In 
St.  Paul's  language,  election  is  in  the  secret  purpose  of 
God,  calling  is  the  outward  expression  of  that  purpose ; 
and  since  we  recognize  the  working  of  the  purpose  only 

'   Rom.  xi.  5-18. 

*  Matt.  xxii.  14.  The  words  are  sometimes  interiiolated  in 
ch.  XX.  16.  There  is  no  ground  for  the  idea  tliat  e/c/cATjo-i'a  is  con- 
nected in  sense  with  K^T^rhs,  meaning  the  company  of  the  called. 
The  etymological  connection  is  accidental. 


The  CJiristian   Society  igy 

by  its  effect,  those  only  are  said  to  be  called  who  obey 
the  Divine  voice.'     The  election  is  of  grace,  for  it  is 
made  in  the  free  working  of  God's  love,  not  for  any 
goodness  or  virtue  in  the  chosen  which  should  make  their 
call  a  moral  necessity.     St.  Paul  illustrates  this  from  the 
Old  Testament  by  the  choice  of  Jacob  and  the  rejection 
of  Esau,  declared  from  before  their  birth.    The  reason  for 
the  choice  remains  unknown  to  us,  secret  in  the  Divine 
wisdom.     It  must  therefore  seem  to  us  purely  arbitrary ; 
but  we  may  not  on  that  account  think  of  it  as  an  arbitrary 
act,  in  the  sense  in  which  unreasoning  preference  on  the 
part  of  a  man  is  arl)itrary.     Neither  on  the  other  hand 
can  we  safely  attempt  to  penetrate  speculatively  into  the 
secret  things  of  God  and  to  assign  a  reason  for  his  choice. 
AVhat  we  know  is  only  the  fact  that  God,  who  sent  his 
Son  to  redeem  the  world,  and  who  has  prepared  salvation 
for  every,  man,  does  in  effect  choose  and  call  certain  men 
to  the  knowledge  of  salvation  and  the  life  of  grace,  while 
others  are  left,  so  far  as  we  know,  without  that  knowledge 
and  the  life  which  it  conveys. 

The  insoluble  question  of  the  relation  of  God's 
sovereignty  to  man's  free  will  is  raised  here  as  elsewhere. 
It  is  complicated  by  the  element  of  foreknowledge.  In 
a  sense  the  election  depends  on  God's  foreknowledge  ; 
m  a  sense  also  it  is  election  to  the  final  attainment  of 
glory  and  blessedness.  "  Whom  he  foreknew,"  says  St. 
Paul,  "he  also  foreordained  to  be  conformed  to  the 
miage  of  his  Son,  that  he  might  be  the  firstborn  among 
many  brethren:  and  whom  he  foreordained,  them  he 
also  called  :  and  whom  he  called,  them  he  also  justified  : 
and  whom  he  justified,  them  he  also  glorified."  An 
attempt  to  reduce  this  teaching  within  the  compass  of 
human  logic  has  led  to  an  exaggerated  doctrine  of 
See  Grimm,  Zext'c,  s.v.  /coAeo.,  and  cf.  Rom.  viii.  30. 


198        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

election.  The  beginnings  of  it  are  in  St.  Augustine. 
It  grew  in  the  schools  of  the  Middle  Ages  to  a  definite 
assertion  that  from  eternity  God  ordained  and  elected 
some  men  to  eternal  life,  others  to  damnation.  Those 
he  calls,  and  brings  to  glory  by  the  effectual  working  of 
his  grace  ;  these  are  either  left  to  their  natural  corruption, 
or  compelled,  for  lack  of  the  grace  of  perseverance,  to 
fall  back  into  the  second  death.  The  doctrine  of  election 
is  thus  combined  with  a  certain  opinion  about  effectual 
grace.  In  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries  it 
became  one  of  the  chief  subjects  of  practical  discussion 
among  Christians.  At  the  present  day,  the  fierce  contro- 
versy being  burnt  out,  it  is  wisely  relegated  to  its  proper 
place,  the  schools  of  theology  ;  and  more  than  this,  it  is 
generally  allowed  that,  even  if  some  such  meaning  lie 
behind  the  teaching  of  St.  Paul,  the  first  and  obvious 
meaning  of  election  is  the  actual  call  of  certain  men  to  the 
jjresent  life  of  grace.  As  Jacob  was  chosen  to  be  the  father 
of  God's  people  while  Esau  was  rejected,  as  a  remnant 
of  Israel  was  preserved  at  various  times  of  general  falling 
away  and  of  consequent  judgment,  so  a  remnant  was 
chosen  to  carry  on  the  traditions  of  Israel  into  the  Church 
of  the  New  Testament,  and  others  were  called  from 
among  the  Gentiles  to  share  their  privileges. 

The  Church  of  Christ  is  then  a  social  organization, 
comprising  all  who  are  elect  and  called  into  the  way  of 
salvation.  They  are  gathered,  not  into  a  mere  aggrega- 
tion of  individuals,  but  into  a  social  unity,  a  spiritual 
commonwealth.  The  gospel  was  first  announced  as  the 
good  tidings  of  the  Kingdom  of  God.  The  Kingdom 
was  at  hand,  said  the  Baptist.  The  Kingdom  of  God  is 
come  upon  you,  said  the  Lord  himself.  The  Kingdom 
of  God,  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,  were  expressions 
already  familiar  to  the  Jews.     The  latter  appears  to  have 


TJie  Christian  Society  199 

been  used  of  the  Divine  rule  or  theocracy  in  general ;  the 
former  signified  more  specially  the  promised  reign  of  the 
Messiah.  It  was  thought  of  as  the  Kingdom  of  David, 
revived  and  extended  to  a  world-wide  empire.  The  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  made  use  of  this  expectation,  gradually  and 
cautiously  revealing  to  his  disciples  the  unlooked-for 
nature  of  the  Kingdom  that  was  to  be.  It  is  natural  to 
take  this  Kingdom  as  the  exact  equivalent  of  the  Church. 
In  the  Gospels  the  word  Eccksia  occurs  but  twice ;  the 
Kingdom  is  spoken  of  continually.  In  the  other  writings 
of  the  New  Testament  the  Kingdom  is  sparingly  referred 
to  ;  the  Ecdesia  is  everywhere.  The  words  apparently 
correspond  and  are  complementary.  But  a  close  ex- 
amination shows  that  the  Kingdom  has  a  wider 
significance.  We  are  taught  to  pray.  Thy  Kingdom  come. 
To  enter  into  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  is  to  attain  the 
final  blessedness.^  It  stands  at  times  for  a  purely  ideal 
state  of  righteousness.^  In  many  places  the  meaning  is 
hard  to  fix  precisely.  In  many  however,  and  especially 
in  several  of  our  Lord's  parables,  the  Kingdom  clearly 
means  the  Christian  society  as  it  now  is  in  the  world, 
including  good  and  evil  men  but  working  always  to  the 
final  exclusion  of  the  wicked.  The  Church  then  cannot 
be  said  to  be  exactly  synonymous  with  the  Kingdom. 
Here,  as  often,  we  are  to  regard  things  in  two  or  more 
planes.  In  the  farther  plane  is  the  reign  of  righteousness, 
the  Kingdom  of  Christ  from  which  all  evil  is  destroyed. 
In  the  middle  plane  is  an  ideal  of  obedience  to  the  laws 
of  God  which  men  are  to  set  before  themselves,  and  by 
striving  to  realize  which  they  may  hasten  his  Kingdom. 
In  the  nearer  plane  is   the  actual   Church,    the  visible 

•   Matt.    V.     20;    vii.  21  ;    viii.     II  ;    xviii.    3;    Mark    ix.    47; 
Luke  xiii.  28;  Acts  xiv.  22  j  I  Cor.  vi.  9  ;  2  Tim.  iv.  18. 
-  Malt.  vi.  33  ;  Mark  x.  14  ;  Epli.  v.  5. 


200        Tlie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

organization  of  the  Kingdom  of  Christ  in  the  world,  the 
community  of  those  who  are  pledged  to  his  service, 
however  ill  they  do  it,  and  made  his  disciples,  however 
imperfectly  they  learn. 

The  Church  thus  organized  is  likened  by  St.  Paul  to  a 
body.  Christ  is  the  Head,  directing  all  the  members, 
and,  according  to  St.  Paul's  conception  of  anatomy,  pro- 
viding them  with  life  and  nourishment.  It  is  therefore 
called  the  mystical  Body  of  Christ.  The  figure  answers 
in  part  to  that  of  the  vine  or  the  olive  tree,  but  St.  Paul 
employs  it  chiefly  for  the  purpose  of  insisting  on  the 
oneness  of  the  Body,  and  the  due  subordination  of  the 
members  in  their  several  offices.  Once  more  the  Church 
is  described  as  an  ordered  society.^ 

It  is  a  visible  society,  the  members  of  which  may  be 
known  and  mutually  recognized  as  brethren.  The  word 
Ecdesia  itself  implies  so  much ;  the  use  of  it  in  the  New 
Testament  is  unintelligible  on  any  other  understanding. 
Calvinists,  in  pursuance  of  their  doctrine  of  absolute 
decrees  of  election  and  reprobation,  are  compelled  to 
distinguish  from  the  visible  Church  an  invisible  Church, 
consisting  of  all  those  and  only  those  who  are  elect  to 
eternal  life.  Others  with  less  excuse  have  followed  their 
exami)le,  taking  the  invisible  Church  to  mean  those  who 
are  known  by  God,  the  reader  of  hearts,  to  be  persevering 
in  the  way  of  salvation.  No  such  distinction  is  found  in 
the  teaching  of  Holy  Scripture.  An  expression  has 
become  current  of  late  years  which  covers  part  of  the 
same  ground.  Certain  men  are  said  to  belong  to  the  soul 
of  the  Church,  though  not  to  the  body.  It  is  a  fanciful 
description,  adopted  by  some  who,  accepting  a  narrow 
definition  of  the  Church,  have  to  face  the  consequent 

'  Rom.  xii.  4,  5  ;  i  Cor.  xii.  12-27  J  Kp'i-  '\-  4-i6  ; 
Col.  ii.  17-19. 


The  Christian  Society  201 

exclusion  of  many  whom  they  are  fain  to  include.  But 
the  Church  is  an  organized  society,  of  which  men  either 
are  members  or  are  not ;  there  is  no  third  term.  If  the 
figure  of  the  Body  be  pressed,  we  must  say  that  as  the 
living  soul  gathers  and  incorporates  matter  into  the  body, 
so  the  Holy  Spirit — the  One  Spirit  that  goes  with  the 
One  Body — incorporates  individual  men  into  the  Body 
of  Christ.  In  this  sense  we  must  read  the  well-known 
maxim  :    Ubi  Spiritus  ibi  Ecdcsia} 

The  Christian  society  includes  all  who  have  received, 
by  whatever  means,  the  grace  of  regeneration.  That 
expulsion  from  the  society  awaits  those  who  abuse  the 
privileges  of  membership  we  are  plainly  taught.  The 
branch  of  the  vine  that  bears  no  fruit  is  cut  away.  But 
the  time  of  such  expulsion  remains  in  doubt.  Dis- 
ciplinary excommunication  by  the  rules  of  the  Church 
on  earth  does  not  entirely  sever  the  delinquent  from  the 
society  of  the  faithful.  Neither  does  apostasy  have  this 
effect,  for  the  apostate  may  be  restored  by  penitence. 
These  diseased  members,  so  to  speak,  are  not  cut  off 
from  the  life  of  the  body,  however  little  it  may  circulate 
in  them.  They  are  not  deprived  of  all  Christian  fellow- 
ship, although  for  reasons  of  discipline  its  outward 
manifestation  be  withheld  from  them.  7"he  mutual 
service  which  members  of  the  Christian  society  owe  to 
each  other  is  not  entirely  denied  them  ;  in  particular, 
they  have  a  share  in  the  prayers  of  the  Church,  and  their 
restoration  is  hoped  for  and  sought  by  the  power  of  these 
prayers. 

More  doubtful  is  the  condition  of  those  who  have 
gone  to  their  death  impenitent.     That  the  possibility  of 

'  The  term  Invisible  Church  ^'as  derived  from  the  scholastic 
theologians,  who  meant  by  it  liowever  the  souls  of  the  departed 
in  Purgatory  or  in  Paradise,  as  lieing  invisible  to  us  on  earth. 


202        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

repentance  ceases  with  death  is  taught  as  certain  truth. 
Repentance  means  the  resolute  turning  of  the  will  away 
from  the  temptations  of  the  world,  the  flesh,  and  the 
devil ;  and  the  disembodied  soul,  whatever  its  faculties, 
being  severed  by  force  from  the  world  and  the  flesh 
can  no  longer  freely  renounce  them.  But  whether  im- 
penitence in  death  actually  cuts  off  the  soul  from  further 
connection  with  the  Church,  or  leaves  entire  severance 
to  follow  upon  the  final  judgment,  is  not  clearly 
revealed.  The  practice  of  the  Church  excludes  those 
who  are  reckoned  to  have  died  impenitent  from  any 
further  share  in  the  offices  of  the  faithful.  Of  secret 
impenitence  indeed  the  Church  is  no  judge,  and  the 
most  hopeful  view  is  taken  of  the  departed ;  but  death 
in  open  defiance  or  apostasy  is  treated  as  ground  for 
exclusion.  Those  who  die  excommunicate,  or  who  by 
reason  of  self-murder  are  judged  to  have  shut  upon 
themselves  the  door  of  penitence,  are  denied  even  the 
funeral  rites  of  the  body. 

All  others  are  regarded  in  death  as  still  members  of 
the  Church.  They  are  sustained  by  the  prayers  of  the 
faithful  in  the  fiery  trial  through  which  they  have  to 
pass ;  and  the  continual  supply  of  abounding  grace 
comes  to  them,  as  to  the  living,  through  the  perpetual 
intercession  of  the  members  of  Christ  one  for  the  other. 
It  is  sometimes  objected  that  no  express  mention  is 
made  in  the  New  Testament  of  prayer  for  the  departed, 
but  there  is  no  need  for  specifying  them  as  objects  of 
l^rayer.  They  are  obviously  included  in  the  supplica- 
tions, prayers,  intercessions,  and  thanksgivings  to  be 
made  for  all  men,  and  in  particular  for  all  the  saints.' 

'  Eph.  vi.  iS  ;  I  Tim.  ii.  I.  I  do  not  think  St.  Paul's  prayer  for 
Onesiphorus  {2  Tim.  i.  18)  can  be  i^ressed,  as  there  is  no  certain 
evidence  that  he  was  then  departed.     Neither  can  ^xq  baptism  for 


T)ie  Christian  Society  203 

And  equally  do  the  departed  souls  themselves  help  in 
this  work  of  intercession.  In  the  words  of  a  Russian 
theologian,  "  All  the  members  of  the  Church,  both  living 
and  departed,  are  being  perfected  incessantly  by  mutual 
prayer."  ^ 

In  the  cult  of  the  departed  the  Christian  Church  has 
taken  over  many  things  from  natural  religion,  which 
have  not  been  winnowed  wholly  free  from  superstition. 
With  these  we  are  not  concerned,  but  only  with  the 
underlying  truth  on  which  they  rest,  the  intercommunion 
of  all  saints  in  prayer  and  worship.  The  practice  of  the 
Church  has  developed  on  two  separate  lines.  In  the 
East,  prayer  is  made  in  the  Liturgy  for  all  the  departed 
alike,  including  even  the  Apostles  and  the  Holy  Mother 
of  God  herself;  and  in  like  manner  the  intercessions  of 
all,  but  chiefly  of  the  more  glorious  saints,  are  sought  by 
the  faithful.  In  the  West,  there  is  a  distinction  made 
between  two  classes  of  the  departed.  For  the  one  class 
prayers  are  offered  by  the  Church.  In  the  other  class 
are  the  perfect  and  glorified  saints,  the  aid  of  whose 
intercession  is  invoked.  The  distinction  is  connected 
with  the  specific  opinions  about  purgatory  which  have 
prevailed  in  A\''estern  Christendom.  In  England,  by 
reaction  from  superstition,  the  cult  of  the  departed 
has  been  altogether  obscured,  and  belief  in  the  Avhole 
Church,  the  communion  of  all  saints  living  and  departed, 
has  been  consequently  weakened. 

the  dead,  spoken  of  in  I  Cor.  xv.  29,  be  safely  adduced,  in  view  of 
our  entire  ignorance  of  the  practice  actually  referred  to. 

'  Khomiakoff,  in  Birkbeck's  I\7(ssia  and  the  English  Church, 
vol.  i.  p.  217. 


204        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 


Sect.  II. — The  Characteristics  of  the  Church 

We  profess  in  the  Creeds  our  belief  in  One  Holy 
Catholic  Apostolic  Church.  These  four  terms  are  known 
as  the  notes  or  characteristic  marks  of  the  Church.  We 
may  consider  them  in  three  aspects  ;  they  show  us  how 
the  Church  is  to  be  regarded  essentially,  ideally,  and 
practically. 

The  Church  is  One.  There  is  numerically  but  one 
Church.  It  was  announced  by  the  Lord  in  the  singular : 
"  Upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church."  It  is  spoken 
of  as  the  Church  of  Christ,  the  Church  of  God,  and 
therefore  is  one,  as  there  is  one  God,  one  Christ.  St. 
Paul  describes  it,  in  terms  excluding  all  possibility  of 
multiplication,  as  the  Body  of  Christ,  the  fulness  of  him 
that  fiUeth  all  in  all.  As  there  is  one  Lord,  one  faith, 
one  baptism,  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  as  there  is  one 
hope  of  our  calling  and  one  Spirit,  so  there  is  one  Body. 
By  the  unity  of  the  Church  we  mean  much  more  than 
numerical  oneness  or  singularity,  but  here  is  the  starting- 
point.  From  this  we  may  go  on  to  understand  how  the 
Church  can  be  spoken  of  in  plurality  and  yet  remain 
one.^ 

The  Church  is  to  be  not  only  one  by  nature,  but 
also  held  together  in  moral  unity.  The  moral  unity 
of  a  society  differs  from  the  natural  by  the  fact  that  it 
can  be  disturbed  without  the  actual  destruction  of  the 
society.  A  state  which  splits  into  several  independent 
states  is  destroyed  altogether :  ceasing  to  be  one,  it 
ceases  to  exist :  if  the  several  states  which  have  re- 
placed it  should  afterwards  come  together  in  federal 
union,    a    new   united  state  is  created  :    the  old    is  not 

'   Matt.  xvi.  18  ;  Eph.  i.  23  ;   iv.  4-6. 


TJie  Characteristics  of  the  Church         205 

restored.  On  the  other  hand  a  family  or  a  nation  which 
is  torn  by  dissension  or  civil  war  still  remains  one, 
though  its  moral  unity  is  ruined.  The  moral  unity  of  a 
society  will  consist  in  the  due  coordination  of  its  several 
members  for  the  mutual  offices  of  social  life.  This  may 
be  attained  in  varying  degrees ;  nothing  short  of  a  total 
dissolution  of  society  will  destroy  it  altogether.  The 
measure  of  its  attainment  will  depend  on  two  forces  :  the 
efficient  maintenance  of  common  order,  and  the  good 
will  of  individuals.  The  need  of  this  moral  unity  in 
the  Church  is  indicated  by  our  Lord's  prayer.  That  they 
all  may  be  one,  and  by  the  frequent  apostolic  injunction 
to  be  of  one  mind.*  That  which  a  thing  inevitably  is 
by  nature,  as  the  Church  is  numerically  one,  is  neither 
prayed  for  nor  enjoined  ;  that  which  is  effected  or 
hindered  by  the  moral  agency  of  men  may  properly  be 
commanded,  and  the  issue  is  controlled  by  prayer. 

The  Apostles  found  it  a  hard  task  to  hold  in  one  the 
Christians  of  Jewish  birth  and  those  who  were  converted 
from  the  Gentiles.  Many  of  St.  Paul's  exhortations  to 
unity  are  directed  against  this  principle  of  division.  It 
was  opposed  to  the  express  declaration  of  the  Lord,  that 
his  sheep  of  the  fold  of  Israel  and  his  other  sheep  which 
were  not  of  this  fold  must  come  together  into  one  flock 
under  one  Shepherd.  The  difficulty  of  the  task  is 
illustrated  by  the  fact  that  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul  had  to 
agree  for  a  time  to  go  apart,  one  to  the  circumcised,  the 
other  to  the  Gentiles,  enjoining  on  their  several  followings 
only  a  mutual  commerce  of  charity.  We  can  follow  in 
St.  Paul's  writings  the  traces  of  a  great  struggle  that 
began  with  the  decree  of  the  Church  at  Jerusalem  con- 
cerning the  treatment  of  Gentile  converts.  He  would  no 
doubt  have  left  us  plainer  indications,  if  he  had  not  been 

'  John  xvii,  21  ;  2  Cor.  xiii.  11  ;  Phil.  ii.  2  ;  i  Pet.  iii.  8,  etc. 


2o6        The  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

careful  to  write  nothing  tiiat  might  embitter  the  conllict. 
The  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  seems  to  mark  the  final 
victory  of  the  cause  which  he  represented ;  he  exults  in 
the  visible  destruction  of  the  wall  of  partition,  the  aboli- 
tion of  the  enmity.  Jew  and  Gentile  were  at  last  actually 
united  in  the  One  Flock.  The  glory  and  honour  of 
nations  the  most  diverse  in  the  world  were  brought 
together  into  the  City  of  God.  In  other  times  a 
national  divergence  or  exclusiveness  far  less  intense  has 
been  found  strong  enough  to  interfere  with  the  perfect 
unity  of  the  Church.  The  vehement  antagonism  of  St. 
Paul  to  such  disunion,  his  refusal  to  accept  distinctions  of 
this  kind  as  a  permanent  basis  even  of  organization  within 
the  Church,  his  insistence  on  the  truth  that  in  Christ  neither 
Greek  nor  Jew  is  any  longer  to  be  recognized,  circum- 
cision nor  uncircumcision,  barbarian,  Scythian,  bondman 
or  freeman,  shows  that  no  account  of  the  unity  of  the 
Church  can  be  adequate  which  makes  it  a  federal 
union  of  independent  societies.  He  bases  the  moral  or 
social  union  of  the  Church  on  the  abiding  fact  of 
common  heritage  in  the  life  of  the  one  Head,  Jesus 
Christ.' 

The  moral  and  the  natural  unity  of  the  Church  are 
thus  coordinated;  the  moral  unity  is  seen  to  be  an 
effort  to  realize  in  social  activity  that  which  is  in  the 
nature  of  things  inevitable  and  indestructible.  Men  are 
one  in  Christ ;  they  are  to  realize  their  unity  in  action. 

The  essential  unity  of  the  Church  consists  in  the 
common  participation  of  the  one  spiritual  life.  Its 
symbol  is  the  one  baptism  by  which  men  are  incorporated 
into  the  one  Body.  The  ideal  unity  of  the  Church  is 
the  perfect  fellowship,  the  perfect  charity,  the  perfect 
intercommunion  of  the  members  in  all  sacred  things, 
'  John  X.  i6  ;  Acts  xv.  ;  Gal.  ii.  7-  14  ;  Eph.  ii.  14  ;  Col.  iii.  11. 


The  Characteristics  of  the  CJmrch         207 

which  ought  to  exist,  and  after  which  we  are  bound  to 
strive.  The  practical  unity  of  the  Church  is  the  measure 
of  such  intercommunion  which  is  actually  attained.  This 
calls  for  more  consideration. 

The  Church  was  originally  organized  in  a  complete 
practical  unity.  A  small  society  of  men  was  gathered  in 
one  place.  "  They  continued  steadfastly  in  the  Apostles' 
teaching  and  fellowship,  in  the  breaking  of  bread  and 
the  prayers."  They  enjoyed,  in  some  degree,  a  com- 
munity of  goods.  There  was  at  least  a  common  stock, 
to  which  all  contributed  according  to  their  means,  and 
from  which  distribution  was  made  to  all  who  needed. 
The  society  seems  to  have  spread  in  the  villages  about 
Jerusalem  without  any  weakening  of  this  unity,  the 
brethren  of  all  parts  being  visited  by  the  Apostles  and 
looking  to  Jerusalem  as  their  one  central  meeting-place.' 
Persecution  however  broke  up  this  intimate  union,  and 
certain  features  of  it  never  recurred.  Some  of  those  who 
were  scattered  found  new  centres  of  activity  in  Antioch 
and  elsewhere.  Local  assemblies  were  formed  on  the 
model  of  that  which  had  been  at  Jerusalem.  Following 
the  pattern  of  the  old  covenant,  these  local  assemblies 
of  the  one  Ecclesia  would  naturally  have  been  called 
Synagogues^  but  for  some  unrecorded  reason  this  word 
did  not  find  favour  among  Christians."  Each  local 
gathering  of  members  was  called  by  the  name  of  the 
whole  society,  Ecclesia. 

'  Acts  ii.  46  ;  iv.  32-35  ;  v.  12,  16  ;  vi.  I-7  ;  viii.  i,  4,  14,  40  ; 
ix.  31-43. 

*  The  only  Christian  use  of  it  is  in  Jas.  ii.  2.  It  may  have 
been  used  in  Jerusalem,  where  synagogues  were  numerous,  but  in 
other  places,  where  the  Synagogue  was  the  recognized  organization 
of  the  Jewish  residents  for  all  purposes,  the  use  of  the  word  for 
Christian  assemblies  might  lead  to  awkward  misunderstandings. 


2o8        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

An  attempt  has  been  made  to  represent  each  local 
church  as  a  fortuitous  collection  of  individuals,  forming 
a  society  of  their  own,  independent  of  other  similar 
societies.  It  would  follow  that  so  far  as  the  whole 
Church  is  one  it  is  a  confederation,  more  or  less  formal, 
of  these  independent  bodies.  But  this  idea  is  foreign  to 
the  apostolic  writings.  In  them  we  find  side  l)y  side  the 
one  Church  and  the  many  churches.  Each  local  church 
reproduces  the  characteristics  of  the  whole ;  each  in- 
dividual Christian  is  a  member  at  once  of  a  local  church 
and  of  tlie  whole  Church.  But  the  one  is  not  made  up 
of  the  many.  "  To  each  local  Ecclesia,"  says  Dr.  Hort, 
"  St.  Paul  has  ascribed  a  corresponding  unity  of  its  own  ; 
each  is  a  body  of  Christ,  and  a  sanctuary  of  God  :  but 
there  is  no  grouping  of  them  into  partial  wholes  or  into 
one  great  whole.  The  members  which  make  up  the  One 
Ecclesia  are  not  communities  but  individual  men.  The 
One  Ecclesia  includes  all  members  of  all  partial  Ecclesiae  ; 
])ut  its  relations  to  them  all  are  direct,  not  mediate."^ 

The  one  is  anterior  to  the  maay ;  the  universal  to  the 
local.  The  original  Church  at  Jerusalem  is  not  to  be 
thought  of  as  a  local  particular  church,  in  imitation  of 
which  others  were  founded.  It  was  the  whole  ;  and  it 
became  local  and  particular  only  upon  the  general 
dispersion  after  the  death  of  Stephen,  when  other  local 
churches  came  into  existence.  Nor  were  these  local 
churches  original  foundations.  That  of  Antioch  is  the 
most  conspicuous  example.  Men  came  to  Antioch  who 
were  already  members  of  the  Church,  and  to  them  were 

'  Thi:  Christian  Ecclesia,  p.  i68.  There  are  passages  in  the 
book  which  look  the  other  way,  but  I  think  that  in  this  passage  is 
the  dominant  thought  with  which  the  others  are  to  be  reconciled ; 
and  Dr.  Mobcrly's  criticism,  in  his  Ministerial  Fricstkood,  pp. 
22-29,  seems  to  me  faulty  because  not  recognizing  this  fact. 


TJie  CJiaracteristics  of  the  CJiurcJi         209 

aggregated  the  new  converts  in  that  cit}'.  That  is  to 
say,  they  were  aggregated  to  the  one  Church,  exactly  as 
the  first  converts  at  Jerusalem  were  aggregated  to  the 
society  of  the  Apostles  in  whom  the  Church  was  already 
constituted.^  The  organization  of  the  local  community 
followed.  At  Antioch,  it  is  true,  "  a  multitude  of 
Christian  disciples  had  come  into  existence  in  the  most 
casual  and  unpremeditated  way ; "  ^  but  they  did  not 
form  themselves  independently  into  a  church ;  they 
were  already  members  of  the  Christian  Church,  and 
they  were  in  consequence  organized  as  the  local  church 
of  Antioch.  This  organization  was  perhaps  the  work 
of  Barnabas,  who  was  clearly  sent  from  Jerusalem  with 
an  apostolic  mission ;  but,  however  effected,  it  was  both 
natural  and  necessary;  as  natural  as  the  organization 
of  the  Synagogue  in  the  Jewish  Dispersion.  A  Jew, 
because  he  was  a  member  of  the  Jewish  Ecclesia,  was 
a  member  of  the  local  synagogue,  wherever  he  might 
find  himself.  A  Christian,  because  he  is  a  member  of 
the  Christian  Ecdcsia,  is  a  member  of  the  local  church, 
wherever  he  may  be.  The  phrase  Church  of  Romc^  or 
Church  of  Africa,  or  Church  of  England,  is  properly  a 
mere  geographical  expression,  signifying  the  part  of  the 
whole  Church  existing  within  the  circumscription  named. 
The  practical  unity  of  the  Church,  therefore,  which  at 
the  beginning  was  found  in  the  intimate  common  life  of 
the  brethren  at  Jerusalem,  is  now  to  be  found  in  the  free 
intercommunion  of  the  members  dispersed  in  the  various 
local  churches.  This  'community  of  charity  begins  when 
all  pray  for  all,  and  all  are  ready  to  help  all  throughout 
the  world.  It  is  complete  when  all,  from  every  local 
church,  are  welcomed  to  all  the  privileges  of  membership 
in  any  local  church  which  they  may  visit.    It  is  now  very 

'  Acts  ii.  41  ;  xi.  19-24.  ^  The  Christian  Ecclesia,  p.  59. 

P 


210        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

far  from  being  complete.  There  are  many  degrees  in 
which  it  may  fall  short  of  completion.  It  was  marred 
when  St.  Peter  and  others  refused  to  eat  with  Gentile 
converts  at  Antioch.  Breaches  of  greater  or  less  extent 
have  frequently  occurred ;  some  are  inveterate.  Without 
affecting  the  essential  and  ideal  unity  of  the  Church,  they 
do  grievous  injury  to  its  practical  or  moral  unity. 

Each  local  church  ought  to  reproduce  the  characteristics 
of  the  whole.  It  is  in  actual  fact  numerically  one,  being 
the  whole  company  of  Christian  men  living  in  a  certain 
place.  It  should  also  be  at  unity  in  itself.  St. 
Paul  was  grievously  disturbed  on  hearing  of  divisions 
or  schisms  in  the  church  of  Corinth.  These  divisions 
were,  in  the  proper  meaning  of  the  term,  sects  ;  that  is  to 
say,  they  were  partisan  companies  of  men  professing  to 
follow  a  certain  leader.  "  Each  one  of  you  saith,  I  am 
of  Paul ;  and  I  of  ApoUos ;  and  I  of  Cephas."  '  There 
is  no  reason  for  supposing  these  sects  to  have  actually 
fallen  asunder  from  mutual  communion,  but  there  was  a 
risk  of  this,  and  the  perfect  union  of  Christian  charity  was 
lacking.  Pearson  has  observed  that  wherever  in  the  New 
Testament  any  country  or  district  is  named  in  which  the 
gospel  had  been  preached,  the  churches  of  that  region  are 
spoken  of  in  plurality,  as  the  churches  of  Judaea,  of  Syria 
and  Cilicia,  of  Galatia  and  Macedonia.  On  the  other 
hand,  where  one  city  alone  is  mentioned,  then  the  church 
of  the  place  is  spoken  of  in  singularity — the  church  at 
Antioch,  at  Ephesus,  the  church  of  the  Thessalonians,  and 
so  forth.  He  infers  that  even  if  in  a  great  city  there 
were  several  congregations,  meeting  apart  for  convenience, 

'  I  Cor.  i.  12.  It  is  doubtful  whetber  the  l-yw  Se  Xpi(7Tou  follow- 
ing is  an  indignant  remonstrance  by  St.  Paul,  or  represents  a 
further  sect,  affecting  superiority  to  all  parties,  but  full  of  party 
spirit. 


TJie  Characteristics  of  the  CJiiircJi         2 1 1 

they  were  all  held  in  one  under  a  common  government/ 
The  conclusion  is  perhaps  too  absolute.  The  domestic 
churches  spoken  of  by  St.  Paul,  the  church  in  the  house 
of  Aquila,  in  the  house  of  Nymphas,  in  the  house  of 
Philemon,^  whether  we  are  to  understand  in  each  case 
only  a  Christian  family,  or  a  company  of  the  faithful 
habitually  meeting  there,  suggest  a  more  elastic  use  of 
the  word.  What  we  know  with  certainty  is  that  very 
soon  after  the  apostolic  age  the  Christians  living  in  one 
town  and  its  neighbourhood  were  held  together  in  a 
unity  depending  on  details  of  organization,  which  we 
shall  consider  in  their  place.  There  is  no  countenance 
in  Scripture  or  in  the  practice  of  the  Church  for  the 
conception  of  an  unity  consisting  in  the  agglomeration  or 
amicable  intercourse  of  sects  organized  according  to  the 
preferences  of  individuals.  Where  the  churches  are 
spoken  of  in  plurality  regard  is  had  only  to  local  or 
geographical  distinction ;  Christians  living  within  the  same 
circumscription,  large  or  small,  form  one  church,  and  are 
bound  to  live  together  in  unity,  avoiding  the  separation 
even  of  party  spirit.  In  this  way  they  work  individually 
to  promote  the  practical  unity  of  the  Church, 

The  Church  is  Holy.  In  the  New  Testament  its 
members  are  commonly  called  saints.  The  fundamental 
meaning  of  holiness,  in  the  language  of  Scripture,  is 
separation  from  sin  and  from  usages  that  are  tainted 
with  sin.  Israel  was  a  holy  nation  because  separated 
from  the  rest  of  mankind  and  dedicated  to  the  service  of 
God.     The  things  of  the  sanctuary,  the  offerings  of  God, 

'  Exposition  of  the  Creed,  p.  338,  8th  ed.  The  passage  in  i  Cor. 
xiv.  34,  which  he  quotes  to  show  that  several  congregations  must 
have  consisted  in  the  Church  of  Corinth,  will  hardly  bear  the 
inference  ;  eV  to7s  tKKKriaiais  may  mean  "at  your  meetings." 

"  Rom.  xvi.  5  ;  I  Cor.  xvi.  19;  Col.  iv.  15  ;  Philem.  2. 


212        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

were  holy  because  set  apart  from  common  use.  There 
was  a  moral  significance  in  this  holiness;  it  was  an 
approximation  to  the  holiness  of  God  himself.  "  Ye  shall 
be  holy  unto  me,"  says  the  Law,  "  for  I  the  Lord  am 
holy,  and  have  separated  you  from  the  peoples,  that  ye 
should  be  mine."  Israel  was  holy  in  essential  fact ;  the 
children  of  Israel  were  therefore  the  more  bound  to 
strive  after  practical  holiness  in  the  likeness  of  God. 
Their  failure  did  not  for  a  time  affect  the  essential  holi- 
ness of  the  nation  ;  but  wiien  the  judgment  of  God  fell  upon 
them  they  were  scattered  among  the  heathen,  losing  their 
mark  of  separation.  A  precisely  similar  command  forms 
the  law  of  holiness  for  the  Church  of  the  New  Testament : 
"  Ye  therefore  shall  be  perfect,  as  your  heavenly  Father 
is  perfect."  ^ 

The  essential  holiness  of  the  Church  consists  in  the 
separation  of  Christians  from  the  world.  On  entering 
the  Christian  society  they  make  a  formal  renunciation  of 
all  evil,  which  is  described  by  St.  Paul  as  dying  to  sin. 
They  are  justified,  as  we  have  seen,  or  freed  from  the 
inherited  and  acquired  guilt  of  sin.  Nor  is  this  a  mere 
forensic  or  ceremonial  cleansing.  They  are  called  to  be 
saints,  and  obeying  the  call  they  receive  a  power  of  holi- 
ness given  them  by  sanctifying  grace.  Being  incorporated 
in  the  one  Body  wherein  dwells  the  one  Spirit  of  holiness, 
they  have  continual  supplies  of  actual  and  habitual  grace. 
They  use  or  abuse  these  gifts  according  to  their  several 
practice ;  but,  says  Pearson,  "  the  Church  of  God  is 
universally  holy  in  respect  of  all,  by  institutions  and 
administrations  of  sanctity."  ^ 

The  Church  of  the  New  Testament,  like  that  of  the 
Old,  but  in  a  higher  sense,  is   "  an  elect  race,  a  royal 

'  Lev.  XX.  26  ;  cf.  xix.  2,  and  xxi.  8  ;  Malt.  v.  48 ;   I  Pet.  i.  15. 
-  Expositio7t  of  the  Creed,  p.  345. 


The  Characteristics  of  the  Church         213 

priesthood,  a  holy  nation."  ^  This  description  must  be 
taken  as  one.  Holiness  and  priesthood  go  together.  A 
priest  is  essentially  a  man  taken  from  among  men  and 
consecrated  to  the  service  of  God  as  representing  his 
fellows.  The  priesthood  of  Christ  is  an  attribute  of  his 
humanity,  and  as  Head  of  the  Church  he  communicates 
his  human  qualities  to  the  Body.  They  are  conveyed  to 
the  members  severally,  all  being  called  to  attain  unto  the 
measure  of  the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ.  There- 
fore he  has  made  us  to  be  a  kingdom,  to  be  priests  unto 
his  God  and  Father.  But  we  have  this  quality  as 
members  of  the  Body,  not  as  individual  men.  The 
Church  as  a  whole  is  the  royal  priesthood. ^ 

The  function  of  a  priest  is  to  offer  gifts  and  sacrifices 
for  sins.^  Here  is  a  twofold  ministry ;  the  ministry  of 
worship  and  the  ministry  of  reconciliation  closely  inter- 
woven. The  various  kinds  of  offering,  distinguished  in 
the  Old  Testament  for  the  sake  of  clearness,  are  com- 
bined in  the  one  offering  of  the  New  Testament,  made 
by  Christ  himself,  the  one  Priest,  and  by  the  Church  in 
union  with  him.  The  essential  holiness  of  the  Church  is 
the  holiness  of  priesthood,  manifested  in  the  continual 
offering  of  the  Christian  Sacrifice  and  in  the  continual 
exercise  of  the  ministry  of  reconciliation. 

The  ideal  holiness  of  the  Church  is  the  holiness  of 
Christ  the  Head  regarded  as  the  standard  of  attainment. 
It  is  the  hoUness  also  of  those  who  have  attained.  In 
the  imagery  of  the  Apocalypse  the  Church  is  the  Bride 
of  the  Lamb,  arrayed  in  fine  linen,  bright  and  pure,  which 
is  the  righteous  acts  of  the  saints.  The  Church  is  the 
Communion  of  Saints,  whether  in  the  sense  that  all  are 
fellow-citizens  with  those  who  are  perfect  and  partakers 

'  Exod.  xix.  6  ;  i  Pet.  ii.  9. 
-  Eph.  iv.  13  ;  Rev.  i.  6 ;  v.  10.  ^  Heb.  v.  i. 


214        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

of  their  merits,  or  in  the  sense  that  all  partake  in  the 
administration  of  holiness  by  which  they  are  brought  to 
perfection.^ 

The  practical  holiness  of  the  Church  is  found  in  war- 
fare against  evil.  Of  this  warfare  there  are  two  well- 
marked  stages.  The  Church  is  triumphant  in  Paradise, 
militant  on  earth.  The  imagery  of  war  is  constant  in  the 
New  Testament,  The  contest  of  the  Church  is  with 
mysterious  powers  of  evil.  "  Our  wrestling,"  says  St 
Paul,  "  is  not  against  flesh  and  blood,  but  against  (he 
principalities,  against  the  powers,  against  the  world-rulers 
of  this  darkness,  against  the  spiritual  hosts  of  wickedness 
in  the  heavenly  places.-  It  is  not  evil  men,  as  men,  who 
are  the  enemies  of  the  Church.  Indeed  the  Church  fights 
on  behalf  of  all  men  against  the  influences  which  ruin 
human  society.  Separate  from  these,  and  essentially 
hostile  to  them,  the  Church  labours  to  set  up  the  reign  of 
righteousness,  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  separation  is 
not  between  man  and  man.  The  Church  militant  is  not 
a  group  of  specially  good  men  segregated  from  their 
fellows.  That  conception,  or  something  approaching  it, 
has  at  times  occupied  certain  minds  with  disastrous 
results,  to  be  read  in  the  history  of  Novatianism,  of 
Donatism,  of  the  Cathari  and  of  the  Puritans.  We  are 
taught  by  the  parables  of  the  Tares  and  of  the  Draw-net 
that  in  the  Church  militant  good  men  and  bad  are 
mingled.  The  holiness  of  the  Church  is  a  power  work- 
ing always  for  the  conversion  of  the  bad,  and  failing  that, 
for  their  exclusion   from    the   Church    triumphant.       It 

■  Rev.  xix.  8  ;  Eph.  ii.  19.  The  question  appears  insoluble 
whether  in  the  phrase  of  the  creed  sanctonim  comnmnionem  the 
word  sanctorum  is  masculine,  signifying  holy  persons,  or  neuter, 
signifying  holy  things. 

*  Eph.  vi.  12. 


TJie  Characteristics  of  the  Church         215 

works  also,  but  less  directly,  to  raise  the  general  standard 
of  goodness  for  the  world  at  large.  Every  local  par- 
ticular church  has  the  note  of  practical  holiness  in  vary- 
ing degree  as  this  work  is  done. 

The  Church  is  Catholic,  or  universal.  The  essential 
catholicity  of  the  Christian  Church  is  opposed  to  the 
national  particularity  of  the  Jewish  Church.  It  is  ex- 
pressed by  St.  Paul  where  he  says  that  in  the  Church 
there  cannot  be  Greek  or  Jew,  barbarian  or  Scythian, 
bond  or  free.  All  men  alike  are  eligible  and  equal  as 
members  of  the  Christian  society. 

The  ideal  catholicity  of  the  Church  is  the  extension 
of  the  privileges  of  membership  to  all  mankind.  It  is 
expressed  in  the  command  of  the  Lord  :  "  Go  ye,  and 
make  disciples  of  all  the  nations."  It  involves  the 
abrogation  of  all  prejudice  of  race  or  colour  ;  the  super- 
session of  all  barriers  of  language,  symbolized  by  the 
mysterious  unity  of  tongues  at  Pentecost ;  the  mainte- 
nance and  propagation  of  the  one  true  religion  by  free 
interchange  of  all  local  traditions.^ 

The  practical  catholicity  of  the  Church  is  an  ap- 
proximation to  the  ideal.  Like  the  practical  unity  of  the 
Church,  it  is  marred  by  everything  that  hinders  the  free 
intercommunion  of  Christians.  It  is  marred  also  by  any 
practice  founded  on  a  theory  which  narrows  the  Church. 
The  Donatists  of  the  fourth  century  held  to  a  theory  con- 
fining membership  in  the  Church  to  those  who  conformed 
to  a  certain  standard  of  excellence,  and  they  refused  all 

'  Matt,  xxviii.  19.  The  last  condition  is  what  St.  Iienaeiis 
expresses  in  the  well-known  words  (iii.  3),  "  Semper  ab  his,  qui  sunt 
undique,  conservata  est  ea  quae  est  ab  apostolis  traditio."  In  the 
circumstances  of  his  time  this  interchange  was  found  fairly  complete 
in  the  local  church  of  Rome,  the  common  resort  of  Cliristians  from 
all  parts  of  the  world. 


2i6        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

communion  with  those  who  thought  or  acted  otherwise. 
This  was  the  negation  of  cathohcity.  A  similar  result 
may  follow  from  any  attempt  to  realize  the  unity  of  the 
Church  by  unwarranted  means.  A  sect  will  naturally  be 
united  in  exact  proportion  to  its  narrowness,  and  a 
definition  of  the  Church  in  which  expression  is  specially 
sought  for  the  note  of  unity  may  tend  to  sectarianism. 
When  certain  theologians  of  the  sixteenth  century  intro- 
duced into  their  definition  of  the  Church  the  mention  of 
the  Roman  Pontiff,  defining  it  as  "  The  congregation  of 
the  faithful  visibly  ordered  under  one  Head  Christ  in 
Heaven  and  his  Vicar  on  earth,"  unity  was  secured  at 
the  cost  of  catholicity.  The  society  so  defined  is  not 
practically  catholic,  since  it  excludes  vast  numbers  of 
Christians.^ 

A  question  remains.  We  have  said  that  a  local  par- 
ticular church  ought  to  reflect  the  characteristics  of  the 
whole  Church.  But  how  can  the  particular  share  the 
attribute  of  universality?  When  a  local  church  is 
described  as  catholic,  the  word  is  used  with  some  varia- 
tion of  meaning.  It  betokens  that  which  is  a  genuine 
part  of  the  whole.  The  Egyptian  bishops  at  the  Council 
of  Tyre,  in  the  year  335,  spoke  of  "the  catholic  church 
in  Egypt,"  as  distinct  from  the  companies  of  heretics  and 
schismatics  which  were  troubling  the  Christian  life  of  the 
country.  In  the  same  sense  it  has,  since  the  fourth 
century,  been  applied  to  individuals.  St.  Augustine 
describes  himself  as  becoming,  on  his  conversion,  a 
Catholic  Christian,  by  contrast  Avith  his  former  condition 
as  a  Manichaean.  A  few  years  earlier,  Theodosius 
had  imposed  by  law  the  name  of  Catholic  Christians 
on  those  who  accepted  the  Nicene  confession  of  faith. - 

'  See  Note  II. 

'  Athanas.,    Op.,   torn.    i.  p.  797  ;    /cora  ttjs  Ka.QoKiKri%  hcKKr^aias 


The  Characteristics  of  the  ClmrcJi         217 

A  catholic  church  is,  in  this  sense,  one  that  is  orthodox 
and  not  heretical,  one  that  is  in  communion  with  the 
Church  at  large  and  not  schismatical.  Nor  is  it  diffi- 
cult to  see  how  the  word  comes  to  be  so  used.  The 
Catholic  Faith  is  that  which  is  generally  professed 
throughout  the  Church,  as  distinct  from  individual  or 
sectarian  opinions.  A  catholic  practice  is  one  that 
prevails  generally  throughout  the  Church,  as  distinct 
from  temporary  and  local  peculiarities.  A  particular 
church  is  catholic  in  proportion  as  it  holds  fast  to  the 
Catholic  Faith  and  catholic  practice,  freely  communicates 
with  all  other  churches,  and  labours  for  the  extension  of 
Christ's  kingdom  throughout  the  world.^ 

The  Church  is  Apostolic.  We  are  built,  says  St.  Paul, 
upon  the  foundation  of  the  Apostles  and  Prophets.  The 
Apostles  are  not  only  the  original  Twelve,  since  the  writer 
certainly  would  not  exclude  himself.  The  Prophets  are 
not  those  of  the  Old  Testament,  but  those  of  the  New, 
the  coadjutors  of  the  Apostles,  to  whom,  he  says,  the 
mystery  of  Christ  has  now  been  revealed.  The  Church 
is  therefore  Apostolic  not  only  because  originally 
established  by  the  preaching  of  the  Apostles,  but  also 
because  held  together  by  a  continuing  apostolic  order. 
At  the  beginning  the  faithful  continued  steadfastly  in  the 

T^s  eV  AiywTCjii.  Aug.,  Confess.,  vi.  i  ;  Cod.  Theodos.,  xvi.  i,  2 
(the  edict  Cunctos  poptdos  of  a.d.  3S0). 

^  Beveridge,  Thesaur.  Theol.,  vol.  ii.  p.  330,  ed.  1S16  :  "  Ut 
quaevis  ecclesia  recte  constituatur,  et  ita  ut  verum  sanumque 
Catholicae  membrum  permaneat,  necesse  est  ut  ad  Catholicam  sive 
universalem  in  omnibus,  quoad  fieri  potest,  se  conformet,  et  dis- 
ciplinam  ritusque  illius  aeque  ac  doctrinam  religiose  complectatur." 
His  illustrations  are  curious.  In  a  secondary'  sense  anything  which 
is  commonly  done  and  allowed  in  any  part  of  the  Church  is  called 
a  catholic  practice  as  being  neither  heretical  nor  schismatical. 


2i8        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Apostles'    teaching   and    fellowship,    and  this  condition 
abides.^ 

For  the  essential  apostolicity  of  the  Church  it  suffices 
that  as  the  first  converts  were  aggregated  to  the  Apostles' 
fellowship,  so  all  that  follow  are  aggregated  to  the  exist- 
ing body.  The  ideal  apostolicity  of  the  Church  involves 
the  continuance  of  the  apostolate  in  some  form,  and 
the  adherence  of  all  Christians  thereto.  The  practical 
apostolicity  of  the  Church  is  a  matter  of  organiza- 
tion, to  the  consideration  of  which  we  proceed  next  in 
order.  Reserving  the  nature  of  that  organization,  wc 
may  say  here  that  a  particular  church  is  apostolic  by 
virtue  of  adhesion  to  the  order  which  continues  the  work 
of  the  apostolate.  The  faithful  of  any  place  or  region 
form  in  point  of  fact  a  local  church,  even  though  not 
yet  organized  in  the  appointed  manner.  The  church  so 
formed  is  apostolic  by  intention,  because  composed  of 
persons  who  are  aggregated  to  the  fellowship  of  the 
Apostles ;  it  obtains  the  fulness  of  the  apostolic  character 
when  duly  organized.  A  church  on  the  other  hand 
which  abandons  the  appointed  order  practically  forfeits 
the  apostolic  character.  A  church  which  is  deprived  of 
it  by  force  of  circumstances  will  retain  the  character, 
though  imperfectly,  by  grace  of  origin. 

Sect.  III. — The  Organization  of  the  Church 

Human  societies  are  of  two  kinds,  natural  and  artificial. 
Natural  societies  are  those  in  which  men  are  incorporated 
not  by  their  own  action  specially  directed  to  that  end, 
but  by  the  fact  of  birth,  or  by  the  working  of  circum- 
stance.    Such  societies  are  the  family,  the  city,  the  nation. 

'  Eph.  ii.  20  ;  iii.  5  ;  Acts  ii.  42. 


The  Organization  of  the  Church  219 

Artificial  societies  are  those  which  individuals  enter  or 
leave  by  their  own  voluntary  motion.  An  artificial  society 
is  formed  by  a  concourse  of  men  who  determine  its 
constitution  and  organization  in  the  act  of  formation  ; 
others  who  afterwards  join  them  accept  what  is  done  ; 
the  members  have  as  a  rule,  though  not  always,  the  same 
power  to  vary  the  organization  which  they  originally 
exercised  in  creating  it.  A  natural  society  on  the  other 
hand  is  of  Divine  origin.  It  cannot  be  traced  back  to 
the  mutual  agreement  of  its  members.  The  theory  of 
Social  Contract,  once  in  vogue,  has  no  historical  founda- 
tion. Every  new  family  or  state  springs  out  of  one 
already  existing  or  is  founded  on  existing  laws.  It  is 
a  part  of  the  natural  organization  of  human  society  im- 
posed by  the  Creator ;  and  therefore  it  can  be  said  that, 
in  all  their  various  forms,  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained 
of  God. 

The  Church  is  not  an  artificial  society.  It  was  not 
originally  fomied  by  a  group  of  individuals  coming 
together  in  voluntary  association.  It  was  in  one  sense 
a  continuation  of  the  Church  of  the  Old  Testament. 
More  precisely  the  Christian  Church  began  with  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself,  the  Son  of  Man,  the  repre- 
sentative of  the  whole  race,  to  whom  individual  men 
were  added  as  engrafted  branches  to  a  tree.  According 
to  another  figure  they  became  members  of  his  Body,  this 
mystical  Body,  the  habitation  of  the  one  Spirit,  being 
brought  into  active  existence  when  the  Holy  Ghost  came 
upon  the  hundred  and  twenty  on  the  Day  of  Pentecost. 
To  the  society  thus  formed  multitudes  were  afterwards 
aggregated  by  the  act  of  God.  Men  do  not  enter  it  by 
their  own  act,  but  by  grace  of  the  new  birth.  But 
neither  is  the  Church  a  natural  society  of  the  same  order 
as  the  state  or  the  family.     It  is  not  one  among  others. 


220        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

an  outgrowth  of  circumstance  or  a  creation  of  human 
law.  It  is  a  supernatural  society  analogous  to  the  natural 
societies  of  the  world,  including  in  idea  the  whole 
of  mankind ;  in  actual  fact,  those  who  are  called  and 
chosen. 

A  society  cannot  exist  without  officers  and  sub- 
ordination. These  elements  are  found  in  the  Church 
from  the  beginning.  The  Apostles  appear  at  once  as 
rulers.  They  are  nowhere  in  Scripture  called  expressly 
by  a  title  implying  as  much,  but  their  authority  is  evident 
in  what  they  do.  It  is  their  doctrine  and  fellowship  to 
which  the  converts  adhere.  Challenged  by  the  Sanhedrin 
to  say  by  what  power  or  in  what  name  they  are  acting, 
they  do  not  disclaim  authority,  but  declare  themselves 
to  be  acting  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ.  Forbidden 
to  teach  in  this  name — a  recognized  act  of  authority 
—they  refuse  to  be  silenced.  They  receive  and  ad- 
minister the  contributions  of  the  faithful,  and  solemnly 
rebuke  irregularity  in  the  matter.  When  further  officers 
are  needed  they  leave  the  selection  of  persons  to  the 
multitude,  but  they  themselves  appoint  the  elected 
to  their  business.  When  the  rest  are  scattered  by 
persecution  they  remain  at  their  post.  When  they 
hear  that  Philip  has  evangelized  Samaria  they  send  two 
of  their  number  to  set  things  in  order.  Through  the 
laying  on  of  their  hands  the  Holy  Ghost  is  given,  and 
Simon  Magus  sees  in  this  a  definite  power  which  they 
might  transfer  to  others.  When  Saul,  returning  from 
Damascus,  assays  to  join  himself  to  the  disciples,  Bar- 
nabas brings  him  to  the  Apostles.  Saul  himself,  become 
Paul  the  Apostle,  rules  tlie  Church  in  the  places  where 
he  has  preached ;  he  judges,  even  in  his  absence,  the 
incestuous  Corinthian,  and  writes  to  the  assembly  at 
Corinth  to  execute   his   sentence ;    he   regulates  many 


I 


The  Organization  of  the  CJiurcIi  221 

things  by  letter,  and  declares  his  intention  of  setting  the 
rest  in  order  when  he  comes.^ 

There  was  power  to  add  to  the  number  of  the  Apostles, 
St.  Paul  and  St.  Barnabas  bore  the  title  expressly.  St. 
Paul,  created  an  Apostle  directly  by  the  Lord,  certified 
his  appointment  by  appealing  to  the  signs  of  an  Apostle 
that  were  in  his  work ;  but  in  the  emphasis  with  which 
he  asserted  that  he  received  his  apostleship  neither  from 
men  nor  through  man  he  indicates  the  ordinary  mode  of 
transmission.  The  reality  of  the  office  does  not  depend 
on  the  title.  Prophets  are  added  to  the  Apostles  on  terms 
of  equality  as  the  foundation  of  the  Church.  Their 
functions  under  this  name  are  obscurely  indicated  in  the 
New  Testament,  and  the  name  did  not  survive  in  the 
Church  ;  but  the  Didachc  shows  that  in  some  regions, 
perhaps  of  backward  development,  there  were  prophets 
in  the  second  century  still  exercising  apostolic  powers. 
Apostleship  derived  from  men  or  through  man  can  only 
be  understood  of  authority  conveyed  from  the  original 
holders.  The  Lord's  commission,  "  As  the  Father  hath 
sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you,"  implies  the  power  of  send- 
ing as  he  sent.  St.  Paul  was  thus  able  to  send  Timothy 
to  Ephesus,  Titus  to  Crete,  with  apostolic  powers,  and 
provision  was  made  for  the  continuance  of  order  in  the 
Church.^ 

There  was  power  to  appoint  other  officers  of  lower 

'  Acts  ii.  42;  iv.  7-10,  18-20,  35;  V.  3-1 1  ;  vi.  3 ;  viii.  i,  19 
(e'louo-i'a)  ;  ix.  27  ;  I  Cor.  v.  3-5  ;  xi.  34. 

^  Acts  xiv.  14;  Rom.  xv.  18,  19;  I  Cor.  ix.  2 ;  2  Cor.  xii.  12  ; 
Gal.  i.  I  ;  Eph.  ii.  20,  and  iii.  5  ;  John  xx.  21  ;  DidacJie,  xi.  I-13. 
It  is  obvious  that  the  solemnity  of  Acts  xiii.  2,  3  was  not  an  appoint- 
ment to  apostleship,  but  a  blessing  on  special  work  to  be  done.  I 
do  not  wish  to  beg  the  question  whether  the  Montanist  prophets 
were  a  genuine  survival. 


222        The  Eleiiie)its  of  Christian  Doctrine 

rank.  We  read  first  of  the  Seven,  chosen  by  the  multitude 
of  the  disciples,  appointed  by  the  Apostles  to  administer 
the  alms  of  the  church.  They  are  generally  recognized 
as  identical  in  office  with  those  afterwards  called  Deacons. 
Somewhat  later  we  hear  incidentally  of  those  called 
Presbyters,  or  Elders,  whose  origin  is  not  recorded 
They  appear  as  ruling  the  church  at  Jerusalem  in  con- 
junction with  the  Apostles,  or  perhaps  in  their  absence. 
We  hear  of  them  next  in  the  cities  of  south  Galatia, 
where  the  Apostles  Barnabas  and  Paul  appointed  elders 
in  every  church  which  they  had  founded.  Some  years 
later  St.  Paul  convened  the  elders  of  the  church  of 
Ephesus,  and  charges  them  to  feed  the  Church  of  God, 
the  flock  in  which  the  Holy  Ghost  had  made  them 
l)ishops  or  overseers.  By  this  second  title  St.  Paul 
also  addresses  the  rulers  of  the  church  at  Philii)pi,  in 
conjunction  with  deacons.  Presbyters,  bishops,  and 
deacons  are  all  mentioned  in  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  and 
St.  Paul  gives  directions  for  their  appointment.' 

Here  are  three  well-defined  offices.  First,  there  are 
the  Apostles  and  Proj^hets ;  secondly,  the  Presbyters 
or  Bishops  ;  thirdly,  the  Deacons.  Many  functions  or 
ministries  are  mentioned  in  the  apostolic  writings, 
about  which  interesting  questions  have  been  raised,  but 
they  are  apparently  descriptions  only  of  the  work  done 
by  members  of  the  Church  in  their  various  capacities  ;  - 

'  Acts  vi.  3  ;  xi.  30;  xiv.  23  ;  xv.  6  ;  xx.  17,  28  ;  Phil.  i.  i  ; 
I  Tim.  iii.  1-13  ;  v.  i,  17-19  J  'I'it-  »•  5-7-  It  '«  possible  that  the 
hundred  and  twenty  of  Pentecost  were  tlie  original  elders.  See 
Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p.  239,  4lh  ed. 

*  Such  are  the  enumerations  in  Rom.  xii.  6  ;  i  Cor.  xii.  4-1 1  ; 
Eph.  iv.  II.  The  Trpwro;/,  Seurfpov,  rpirov  of  I  Cor.  xii.  28  is 
more  suggestive  of  a  hierarchy,  but  there  also  the  dominant  thought 
is  that  of  different  functions  for  different  members  in  the  most 
general  sense,  and  probably  the  meaning  goes  no  further. 


The  Organirjation  of  the  Church  223 

these  three  alone  stand  out  clearly  as  official  grades. 
The  titles  explain  themselves.  They  were  all  words  in 
common  use.  The  title  of  Presbyter  was  used  in  the 
Synagogue  ;  but  the  Jewish  elder  was  a  purely  judicial 
officer,  and  had  no  pastoral  authority  like  that  of  the 
elders  at  Ephesus,  nor  any  functions  like  those  which 
St.  James  attributes  to  the  Christian  presbyters  in  the 
care  of  the  sick.  It  is  a  title  of  respect  which  in  one 
form  or  other  all  antiquity  applied  to  those  exercising 
authority.  The  words  bishop  and  deacon,  signifying  over- 
sight and  service  of  almost  any  kind,  have  acquired 
their  specific  meaning  by  association.  It  is  perhaps  not 
altogether  accidental  that  in  the  account  of  the  election 
of  St.  Matthias  the  titles  of  deacon  and  bishop  are 
adumbrated,  as  well  as  that  of  apostle.  The  other 
grades  may  be  regarded  as  implicit  in  the  apostolate, 
and  derived  from  it  by  a  partial  conveyance  of  its 
functions.^ 

The  Apostles  and  Prophets  exercised  a  general 
ministry  throughout  the  Church,  subject  to  such  de- 
limitation as  was  made  for  a  time  between  St.  Peter 
and  St.  Paul,  and  perhaps  to  the  general  principle  that 
one  should  not  cross  the  work  of  another  or  build  on  his 
foundation.^  The  Presbyters  or  Bishops  had  the  pastoral 
charge  of  the  local  churches.  The  Deacons  were  their 
assistants,  and  may  also  have  been  companions  of 
the  Apostles.  This  we  gather  from  the  writings  of  the 
New  Testament.  The  same  system  is  found  in  the 
Didache,  a  document  of  not  later  date  than  the  beginning 
of  the  second  century,  which  represents  the  practice 
apparently  of  Hebrew  Christians  in  eastern  Syria  or  in 
Egypt.  Contemporaneous  with  this  are  the  letters  of 
St.  Ignatius  to  the  churches  of  Rome  and  of  Asia.  In 
'  Jas.  V.  14 ;  Acts  i.  17,  20,  26.  -  Rom.  xv.  20. 


224        The  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

these  a  different  arrangement  of  the  ministry  is  imphed. 
There  is  no  mention  of  Apostles  or  Prophets,  nor  of 
any  general  oversight  of  many  local  churches  such  as 
they  had.  The  titles  of  Bishop  and  Presbyter  are  dis- 
tinguished, and  in  each  local  church  there  is  one  Bishop 
who  presides,  and  several  Presbyters  who  are  his  sub- 
ordinates. This  arrangement  became  universal,  but 
gradually  and  not  without  modification.  There  are 
grounds  for  supposing  the  churches  of  southern  Italy 
under  the  shadow  of  Rome,  and  those  of  Egypt  under 
Alexandria,  to  have  had  less  independence  than  others. 
Gaul  had  but  one  Bishop  in  the  second  century,  and  the 
extensive  Roman  province  of  Scythia  was  in  the  same 
case  much  later.  St.  Clement  of  Rome,  an  elder  con- 
temporary of  Ignatius,  could  still  speak  of  Bishops  and 
Deacons  after  the  manner  of  St.  Paul,^  but  from  the 
early  years  of  the  second  century  onward  the  Ignatian 
nomenclature  is  universal. 

Here,  as  in  the  time  of  the  Apostles,  there  is  a 
three-fold  ministry,  l)ut  with  a  change  of  title.  The  pur- 
port of  this  change  is  matter  of  debate.  Two  different 
opinions  have  had  so  much  support  in  the  teaching 
of  the  Church  that  neither  can  be  taken  for  a  solid 
Christian  tradition.  According  to  one  opinion  the 
universal  itinerant  ministry,  which  the  Apostles  had 
exercised  in  person  or  by  delegates,  was  gradually  con- 
verted into  a  local  ministry  by  the  settlement  of  men, 
apostolic  in  rank  and  power,  in  the  several  churches. 
The  first  example  is  found  in  St.  James  of  Jerusalem. 
Either  from  a  general  sense  of  what  was  fitting,  or  by 
a  regular  decision  of  the  last  surviving  Apostles,  it  was 
resolved  to  fix  one  such  supreme  governor  in  each 
church,  and  to  him  exclusively  was  given  the  title  of 
'  Clem.,  Ad  Cor.  42. 


1 


The  Organization  of  the  Church 


■^3 


Bishop,  formerly  common  to  the  presbyters.  The 
historic  episcopate  is  therefore  in  the  narrowest  sense 
a  continuation  of  the  apostolate,  and  the  presbyterate 
remains  what  it  was  from  the  beginning.  According  to 
the  other  opinion,  which  became  current  mainly  through 
the  influence  of  St.  Jerome,  the  apostolate  in  the 
narrower  sense  was  allowed  to  pass  away ;  from  among 
the  presbyters  or  bishops,  originally  of  equal  power  and 
dignity,  one  was  chosen  to  preside  in  each  church,  to 
whom  were  eventually  reserved  certain  functions  of  the 
ministry  and  the  title  of  Bishop.  In  whatever  way  it 
came  about,  a  well-supported  tradition  attributes  the 
final  settlement  to  the  old  age  of  St.  John  the  Apostle 
at  Ephesus.' 

What  is  common  to  apostolic  and  to  later  times, 
according  to  either  opinion,  is  the  existence  of  a  hierarchy 
in  the  Christian  Church  with  powers  of  extension.  The 
establishment  of  this  hierarchy  is  traced  to  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  himself.  Practically  it  will  matter  little 
whether  we  suppose  him  to  have  enjoined  a  particular 
constitution  of  the  Ministry,  or  to  have  given  his  Church 
the  power  of  organizing  it  according  to  need.  On  either 
showing  the  hierarchy  is  in  present  fact  founded  in  a 
certain  order.  In  the  latter  case  however  Christian 
doctrine  would  be  concerned  only  with  the  principle  that 
an  organized  society  must  have  an  ofificial  organization. 
The  establishment  of  a  certain  form  of  hierarchy,  though 
unchangeable  except  by  the  concurrent  action  of  the 
whole  body,  would  be  a  matter  purely  of  ecclesiastical 
law.  Christian  tradition  supports  the  former  hypothesis, 
that  Christ  himself  ordained  the  hierarchy  by  instruction 
given  to  the  Apostles.     It  was  part  of  the  Divine  order, 

'  The  question  is  discussed  by  Gore,  The  C/iiirc/i  and  the 
Ministry,  4th  ed.  pp.  157-162  and  304,  305. 

Q 


226        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

and  St.  Paul  could  tell  the  Presbyters  of  Ephesus  that  they 
were  made  Bishops  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  They  were  not 
merely  designated  by  a  Divine  inspiration  for  a  special 
work,  as  were  Barnabas  and  Saul  at  Antioch  ;  they  were 
ordained,  if  by  human  agency,  still  by  the  power  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.^ 

The  hierarchy  thus  ordained  is  a  corporate  unity. 
The  Twelve  Apostles  had  a  single  authority,  exercised 
by  each  one  of  them  not  independently,  but  jointly  with 
the  rest.  They  jointly  sent  Peter  and  John  to  Samaria 
to  confirm  what  was  done  by  Philip.  When  St,  Peter 
himself  had  for  the  first  time  admitted  a  Gentile  to 
baptism,  though  he  acted  by  revelation,  he  had  to  give 
an  account  of  what  he  had  done  to  the  rest.  In  united 
session,  along  with  the  Presbyters,  the  Apostles  regulated 
the  proceedings  of  Paul  and  Barnabas  in  the  same  matter. 
According  to  St.  Cyprian's  view  of  the  case,  our  Lord 
gave  the  apostolic  commission  in  the  first  place  to 
Peter  alone,  and  afterwards  conjoined  the  rest  with  him 
in  the  same  office  and  ])ower,  so  as  to  show  the  unity 
of  their  authority  by  its  originating  with  one  man.  This 
may  be  fanciful,  but  it  serves  to  illustrate  the  traditional 
conception  of  the  hierarchy  which  St,  Cyprian  has  put 
on  record.  Unity  and  concord  in  the  Church  depend, 
first  on  the  due  subordination  of  all  Christians  to  the 
Bishops  severally  set  over  them,  secondly  on  the  united 

'  Acts  XX.  28.  The  force  of  €06to  seems  unmistakable.  Compare 
I  Cor.  xii.  28,  where  it  is  used  of  xap'o'MaTa  generally.  Possibly  5ia 
irpo<pr]Tfias  in  1  Tim.  iv.  14  conveys  the  same  sense.  The  witness 
of  St.  Clement  to  the  settlement  of  the  hierarchy  by  instruction  of 
Christ  himself  is  express :  Ka!  0!  dirSffToXoi  tj/jlcov  iyv(aaa.v  Sio  toxi 
Kvp'tov  r]/xa>i'  'hjffov  Kpiarov  Sti  (pis  Xffrai  eVt  lov  ouSixaros  rrjs 
67ri(r/co7rf)s.  Aia  ravTTjv  oiiv  t})V  aiTLaf,  ivpiyvoicnv  (l\r](puT(i  TtXeiav 
Ka.T(.(rT7]crav  tovs  Trpoitpri/xfyovs,  /c.t.A.  {Ad  Cor.,  44). 


Tlie  Organif:ation  of  tJie  Church  227 

action  of  the  Bishops  among  themselves.  The  episco- 
pate, says  St.  Cyprian,  is  one  and  undivided;  every 
single  bishop  holds  the  common  authority  in  joint 
tenure;  each  one  has  the  right  to  act  on  his  own  re- 
sponsibility, rendering  account  to  God,  but  he  retains 
this  right  only  on  condition  of  abiding  in  concord  with 
the  rest  and  in  the  mystical  unity  of  the  Church.  In 
practice  the  social  needs  of  the  Church  have  led,  since 
St.  Cyprian's  day,  to  provincial  combinations,  and  to 
some  measure  of  subordination  within  the  episcopate; 
but  these  things  are  purely  matter  of  ecclesiastical  law, 
and  do  not  belong  to  the  essential  organization  of  the 
Church.  1 

Appointment  to  the  hierarchy  appears  from  the  writings 
of  the  New  Testament  to  be  in  the  hands  of  the  Apostles 
and  their  coadjutors.  The  examples  are  few  but  uniform  ; 
for  if  St.  Paul  speaks  of  Timothy  as  advanced  "  by  pro- 
phecy, with  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of  the  presbytery," 
he  explains  this  elsewhere  by  the  exhortation,  "  Stir  up 
the  gift  of  God  which  is  in  thee  through  the  laying  on  of 
my  hands."  -  Afterwards  the  power  of  appointment  lay 
exclusively  in  the  Bishop  as  now  distinguished  from 
the  presbyters.  The  action  of  Colluthus,  an  Egyptian 
presbyter  of  the  fourth  century,  who  presumed  to  ordain 
a  certain  Ischyras  to  the  presbyterate,  was  treated  as  an 
impossible  innovation.  The  contention  of  Aerius,  later 
in  the  same  century,  that  presbyter  and  bishop  were 
of  equal  dignity  was  rejected  on  this  very  ground ;  the 
uniform  tradition  of  the  Church  was  against  him.  St. 
Jerome,  whose  tendency  was  to  exalt  the  presbyterate 

*  See  Note  I. 

*  Acts  vi.  6  ;  xiv.  23  ;  i  Tim.  iv.  14 ;  2  Tim.  i.  6  ;  Tit.  i.  5. 
Possibly  Rom.  i.  II,  'Iva.  n  /xeraScJ  x^f"""/""  ^M-^^'i  looks  tlie  same 
way. 


228        TJie  Eleuiotts  of  C/iristiau  Doctrine 

and  abase  the  episcopate,  allowed  that  in  respect  of 
ordination  the  Bishop  was  superior.^  If  the  episcopate 
be  the  direct  continuation  of  the  apostolate,  this  exclusive 
right  of  the  Bishop  is  at  once  accounted  for ;  there  is  no 
reason  for  supposing  presbyters  ever  to  have  had  the 
power  of  ordination.  But  if  the  origin  of  the  episcopate 
be,  as  St.  Jerome  supposed,  the  selection  of  one  man  out 
of  the  presbytery  for  supreme  authority,  it  will  follow 
that  all  the  original  presbyters  or  bishops  had  the 
same  power  to  ordain.  The  reservation  of  this  power  to 
the  one  Bishop  would  then  seem  to  be  a  matter  only  of 
ecclesiastical  discipline.  The  presbyters  in  that  case 
retain  implicitly  the  power  to  ordain,  but  are  forbidden 
to  exercise  the  power.  Some  colour  is  given  to  this 
contention  by  the  custom  which  requires  the  presbyters 
present  at  an  ordination  to  take  part  with  the  Bishop  in 
the  imposition  of  hands.  There  may  seem  to  be  here 
intended  a  real  joint  action,  controlled  only  in  practice 
by  a  rigorous  adherence  to  the  Ignatian  maxim  of  doing 
nothing  without  the  Bishop,  so  that  ordination  by 
presbyters  alone  in  the  absence  of  a  Bishop,  though 
unlawful,  would  not  be  strictly  impossible.'^  Mediaeval 
theologians,  following  St.  Jerome,  and  regarding  the 
orders  of  the  ministry  chiefly  as  concerned  with  the  Sacra- 
ment of  the  Altar,  exaggerated  the  equality  of  bishop 
and  presbyter,  and  prepared  the  way  for  those  who 
in  the  sixteenth  century  claimed  for  presbyters  not  only 

'  For  Colliithus,  see  Athanas.,  Apol.  ad  Constaii/.,  ii,  12,  and 
74,  torn.  i.  pp.  732,  794.  For  Aeriiis,  Epiphanius,  Ach:  Hacr., 
Ixxv.  4.  Jerome,  Ep.  cxlvi.  :  "  ()iiid  facit,  excepta  ordinatione, 
episcopus  quod  presbyter  non  facial  ?  " 

-  Ign.,  Ad  Trail.,  2  :  i.vi\)  roO  iiricTKUTrov  fxrjSei'  npaaaav  v/xas. 
Butcf.  Ad  J\fagn.,  7  :  &viVTOv  iiriffKOirov  koi  twu  irpicr^vripuiv  /j.7iS(y 
■KpaaaeTi. 


The  Organization  of  the  Church  229 

the  power  but  the  right  to  ordain.  The  question  is  for 
theologians,  and  is  rather  of  academic  than  of  practical 
interest,  since  there  can  at  best  be  no  certainty  that  a 
presbyterian  ordination  is  valid,  and  no  one  whose 
ordination  is  doubtful  can  be  allowed  to  minister  in  the 
Church/ 

The  Church  being  a  holy  priesthood,  the  ministers  of 
the  Church  must  of  necessity  exercise  priestly  functions. 
All  Christians  being  made  priests  unto  God,  those  are 
eminently  so  who  preside  in  the  Christian  society.  They 
are  nowhere  expressly  called  by  this  title  in  the  writings 
of  the  New  Testament,  and  only  in  the  one  case  of  the 
"  prophets  and  teachers "  at  Antioch  are  their  ministra- 
tions spoken  of  in  ordinary  terms  of  priesthood.^  So 
long  indeed  as  the  Temple  worship  continued,  this  could 
not  be  done  without  danger  of  confusion.  In  the  Epistle 
to  the  Hebrews  it  is  said  even  of  Christ  himself,  that  "  if 
he  were  on  earth  he  would  not  be  a  priest  at  all,  seeing 
there  are  those  who  offer  the  gifts  according  to  the  law."  So 
in  the  second  century  the  Apologists,  addressing  readers 
who  knew  only  the  Gentile  sacrifices,  could  escape  mis- 
understanding only  by  repudiating  in  the  name  of 
Christians  the  very  idea  of  sacrifice.  "  God  has  no  need 
of  material  offerings  from  men,"  wrote  St.  Justin  Martyr, 
"  He   does    not    require    blood,    libations,    or  incense." 

•  See  Note  K. 

'  Rev.  i.  6  ;  Acts  xiii.  2,  \it.Tovp-^ovvTu>v  5e  avrdv  rw  Kvpiai.  The 
words  Xfirovpyf7v  and  Mnovpyia  are  commonly  used  in  the  LXX. 
for  the  offices  of  the  priesthood.  So  also  in  Luke  i.  23  ;  Heb. 
ix.  21;  X.  n,  of  the  Old  Testament  worship.  In  Heb. 
viii.  2,  XnTovpyhs  is  used  of  Christ  as  priest.  In  Rom.  xv.  16,  St. 
Paul  speaks  of  his  apostolic  work  in  terms  of  priesthood — AnTovpyhv, 
UpovpyovvTa,  ■npo(r<popa. — but  meta]:ihorically.  Compare  Phil.  ii. 
17  ;  and  observe  that  St.  Paul  also  uses  Xnrovpyus  in  a  more 
general  sense,  Rom.  xiii.  6. 


230        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Athenagoras  concludes  a  similar  repudiation  with  the 
words  :  "  Yet  are  we  bound  to  offer  a  bloodless  sacrifice, 
and  our  reasonable  service ;  "  but  he  is  speaking,  osten- 
sibly at  least,  of  purely  metaphorical  offering.  Against 
Trypho  the  Jew,  on  the  other  hand,  St.  Justin  plainly 
asserts  the  sacrifice  offered  in  the  Eucharist  as  foretold  by 
Malachi,  In  the  Didachc  the  Prophets  are  called  High 
Priests,  and  the  Eucharist,  though  treated  with  singular 
inadequacy,  is  spoken  of  as  a  sacrifice.  St.  Clement  of 
Rome  uses  of  the  Christian  ministry  in  one  passage 
words  which  he  elsewhere  applies  freely  to  the  priesthood 
of  the  Old  Testament.  St.  Ignatius  declares  in  con- 
nection with  the  Eucharist  that  as  there  is  one  Bishop  so 
there  must  be  one  altar.  By  the  middle  of  the  third 
century  the  bishop  was  freely  called  a  Priest,  as  may  be 
seen  especially  in  the  writings  of  St.  Cyprian.  The  title 
was  afterwards  extended  as  freely  to  presbyters,  and  in 
most  Western  languages,  as  in  English,  a  word  derived 
from  presbyter  is  the  only  term  in  use  to  express  the 
meaning  of  priest} 

The  fundamental  work  of  priesthood  is  to  offer  gifts 
and  sacrifices  for  sin.  To  offer  the  gifts  in  holiness  is, 
according  to  St.  Clement,  a  characteristic  office  of  bishoj) 
or  presbyter.  The  essential  act  of  Christian  worshij), 
the  blessing  of  the  bread  and  wine  to  become  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ,  the  Christian  Sacrifice,  has  always 
been  reserved  to  him.  Tlie  work  of  priesthood  is 
completed  in  what  St.  Paul  terms  the  ministry  of 
reconciliation.-' 

About  the  nature  of  this  ministerial  priesthood  there 
are  two  opinions  current.  According  to  the  one  opinion 
the  Lord  conferred  immediately  upon  the  Apostles  tlie 
power  of  offering  when  he  bade  them  "  Do  this,"  at  tlie 

'  Ileb.  viii.  4.     See  Note  L.  -'  Heb.  v.  i  ;   2  Cor.  v.  18. 


The  Organisation  of  the  Church  231 

institution  of  the  Eucharist,  and  in  Hke  manner  conferred 
on  them  the  ministry  of  reconcihation  by  the  words, 
"  Whosesoever  sins  ye  forgive,  they  are  forgiven  unto 
them."  They  handed  on  these  powers  to  others,  who  thus 
have  a  priesthood  distinct,  though  inseparable,  from  their 
function  as  pastors  and  rulers  of  the  Church.  According 
to  the  other  opinion,  these  words  of  the  Lord  were 
spoken  to  the  Apostles  rather  as  representing  the  Church 
than  as  individuals ;  the  powers  of  priesthood  were  con- 
ferred immediately  on  the  whole  society,  and  mediately 
on  the  ministers  of  the  society.  These  are  priests 
because  they  are  pastors  and  rulers  of  the  priestly  Church ; 
they  are  organs  of  the  Body  of  Christ  in  its  priestly 
character.  The  distinction  is  theological;  it  is  of  no 
practical  importance,  since  in  either  case  the  powers  of  the 
ministry  are  derived  by  transmission  from  the  Apostles. 

We  have  considered  only  what  belongs  to  Christian 
doctrine.  The  organization  of  the  Church  in  detail, 
the  institution  of  subordinate  offices,  the  relations  of  the 
higher  ministries,  are  matters  of  ecclesiastical  rule.  The 
powers  of  the  sacred  ministry,  on  the  other  hand,  are  a 
charisma,  a  gift  of  grace.  The  work  of  the  ministry 
is  described  by  St.  Paul  as  the  building  up  of  the  Body  of 
Christ.  The  Apostles  and  those  associated  with  them  are 
ambassadors  of  Christ,  workers  with  God,  and  stewards 
of  his  mysteries,  labourers  in  the  harvest  of  souls,  fishers 
of  men.  Their  task  is  to  help  in  the  formation  of  the 
Christian  character,  by  communicating  the  knowledge 
and  the  grace  of  God.  It  may  be  summed  up  as  the 
ministry  of  the  Word  and  the  Sacraments,  which  two 
aspects  of  it  we  now  proceed  to  consider.^ 

'  Eph.  iv.  12;  cp.  Rom.  xv.  20;  i  Cor.  iii.  9;  2  Cor.  x.  8; 
xii.  19  ;  Col.  ii.  7.  Also  i  Cor.  iv.  i  ;  2  Cor.  v.  20  ;  vi.  i  ;  Tit. 
i.  7  ;  I  Pet.  iv.  10  ;  Matt.  ix.  38  ;  Mark  i.  17  ;  Gal.  iv.  19. 


232        The  E/eincnts  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Sect.  lY .—  The  Ministry  of  t/ic  Word 

Christianity  is  the  religion  of  the  Incarnate  Word  of 
God,  Jesus  Christ,  to  whom  is  perfectly  known  the  will 
of  the  Father,  and  by  whom  it  is  revealed  to  men.  That 
which  he  taught,  that  which  as  received  from  him 
the  Apostles  spread  through  the  world,  is  called  em- 
phatically the  Word.  What  this  means  we  see  most 
clearly  in  the  address  of  St.  Peter  before  Cornelius, 
where  he  brings  together  in  equal  apposition  the  \Vord 
sent  forth  from  God,  the  Matter  so  revealed,  and  the 
Person  of  Jesus  Christ.^  The  expression  was  not  new. 
From  old  time  the  Word  of  God  meant  a  revelation  of 
the  Divine  will  or  purpose.  The  Word  of  God  came  to 
the  prophets  of  the  Old  Testament,  came  to  John  the 
Baptist,  the  precursor  of  the  New,  came  and  dwelt  among 
us  in  the  Person  of  the  Incarnate  Son.  From  the  day 
of  Pentecost  the  Apostles  spoke  the  Word  of  God  with 
boldness.  This  was  their  special  work ;  they  appointed 
the  Seven  because  it  was  unmeet  for  them  to  forsake  the 
Word  and  serve  tables.  They  were  eye-witnesses  and 
ministers  of  the  Word.  They  declared  that  which  they 
had  beholden  and  their  hands  had  handled,  concerning 
the  Word  of  Life.  Through  them  the  Word  of  God 
grew  mightily  and  prevailed.'-^ 

The  Ministry  of  the  Word  is  the  task  of  making  duly 
known  to  the  world  the  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ.  This 
knowledge  may  reach  the  minds  and  hearts  of  men  by 

'  Acts  X.  36-38.  Ti)v  Koyov — tA  jivofxivov  pijfia — 'lijo'oiij'  t6v 
diTo  No^apeV — are  grammatically  in  apposition,  the  object  of  v/ieis 
o'lSare.  The  word  prj/xa  signifies  the  matter  spoken  of ;  here,  the 
events  of  the  Gospel.     Cp.  i  Pet.  i.  23-25. 

^  I  Sam.  iii.  i  ;  xv.  10  ;  John  x.  35  ;  Luke  iii.  2  ;  John  i.  14 ; 
Acts  iv.  31  ;  vi.  2  ;  I.uke  i.  2  ;   i  John  i.  I  ;  Acts  xix.  20. 


The  Mmistry  of  the   Word  233 

various  channels,  but  there  are  special  means  appointed. 
The  ^Vord  is  preached,  that  is  to  say,  solemnly  proclaimed 
as  by  a  herald:  and  for  this  solemn  proclamation  a 
commission  is  required.  "How  shall  they  preach, 
except  they  be  sent?"  asks  St.  Paul.  This  mission 
makes  the  Apostle;  on  its  continuance  depends  the 
Ministry  of  the  Word.^ 

The  mission  is  solemnly  granted  in  the  words  of  the 
Lord  recorded  by  St.  Matthew  :  "  All  authority  hath  been 
given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  on  earth.  Go  ye  there- 
fore, and  make  disciples  of  all  the  nations,  baptizing 
them  into  the  Name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and 
of  the  Holy  Ghost :  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things 
whatsoever  I  commanded  you  :  and  lo,  I  am  with  you 
alway,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world."  - 

Four  words  are  specially  noticeable  here.  The  com- 
mission is  based  on  the  authority  or  legitimate  power 
which  is  granted  to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  his  human 
nature.  It  is  a  commission  to  make  disciples,  which  is 
to  bring  men  into  a  fixed  relation  of  submission  to  a 
master.  The  purport  of  the  mission  is  to  make  known 
what  Christ  cojnmandcd ;  a  rule  of  life  and  conduct  is 
proposed,  as  of  equal  importance  with  the  facts  of 
revelation.  But  this  rule  is  proposed  by  way  of  teaching; 
no  power  is  given  to  enforce  it  by  pains  and  penalties. 

We  may  here  observe  once  more  that  nothing  practical 
turns  on  tlie  question  whether  in  giving  this  mission  the 
Lord  addressed  the  Apostles  as  such,  or  the  Church  at 
large.  In  the  latter  case  it  is  still  the  Ministers  of  the 
Word  by  whom  the  powers  given  to  the  Church  are 
exercised. 

About  the  proposition  of  faith  much  has  been  said  in 
the  Introduction  w  hich  need  not  be  repeated.     What  we 

'   Rom.  N.  15.  •-'   Matt,  x.wiii.  18-20. 


234        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctritie 

have  now  to  consider  may  come  under  the  heading  of 
the  four  words  above  noted. 

All  authority  is  given  to  the  Son  of  Man,  The 
Ministry  of  the  Word  does  not  exhaust  this  authority ; 
it  is  one  mode  of  its  exercise.  We  are  reminded  of  the 
authority  given  to  the  Son  of  Man  on  earth  to  forgive 
sins  ;  but  we  may  find  another  aspect  of  his  authority 
which  looks  more  directly  to  the  Word.  The  Father 
"  gave  him  authority  to  execute  judgment,  because  he 
is  the  Son  of  Man."  What  is  this  judgment?  "For 
judgment  came  I  into  this  world,"  he  said,  "  that  they 
which  see  not  may  see  ;  and  that  they  which  see  may 
become  bhnd."  Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  "  God  sent  not 
the  Son  into  the  world  to  judge  the  world ;  but  that  the 
world  should  be  saved  through  him."  "  If  any  man  hear 
my  sayings,  and  keep  them  not,"  he  said,  "  I  judge  him 
not  :  for  I  came  not  to  judge  the  world,  but  to  save  the 
world.  He  that  rejecteth  me,  and  receiveth  not  my 
sayings,  hath  one  that  judgeth  him  :  the  word  that  I 
spake,  the  same  shall  judge  him  in  the  last  day,"  Reading 
together  these  passages  from  St,  John's  Gospel,  with  their 
superficial  contradiction,  we  see  what  is  the  judgment 
spoken  of.  Judgment  is  not  the  purpose  but  the  con- 
sequence of  the  coming  of  the  Son  into  the  world.  He 
came  to  save  the  world  from  the  judgment  of  death ; 
and  this  salvation  was  by  his  Word.  "  He  that  heareth 
my  Word,"  he  said,  "  and  believeth  him  that  sent  me, 
hath  eternal  life,  and  cometh  not  into  judgment,  but 
hath  passed  out  of  death  into  life,"  But  there  is  a  con- 
verse :  "  He  that  obeyeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life, 
but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him,"  The  effect  of 
the  ^Vord  is  therefore  judgment ;  the  marking  of  those 
who  reject  the  truth,  "  He  that  believeth  on  him  is 
not   judged :    he   that  believeth   not   hath    been   judged 


The  Ministry  of  the   Word  235 

already,  because  he  hath  not  beUeved  on  the  name  of  the 
only-begotten  Son  of  God.  And  this  is  the  judgment, 
that  the  light  is  come  into  the  world,  and  men  loved  the 
darkness  rather  than  the  light :  for  their  works  were  evil." 
The  authority  to  execute  judgment  is  therefore  identical 
with  the  power  of  communicating  eternal  life  by  the 
Word  of  truth.  '  This  power  is  spoken  of  once  more  in 
the  prayer  of  the  Lord  Jesus  at  the  Last  Supper  :  "  Thou 
gavest  him  authority  over  all  flesh,  that  whatsoever  thou 
hast  given  him,  to  them  he  should  given  eternal  life. 
And  this  is  life  eternal,  that  they  should  know  thee  the 
only  true  God,  and  him  whom  thou  didst  send,  even 
Jesus  Christ."  The  judgment  continues  in  the  work  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  :  "  He,  when  he  is  come,  will  convict 
the  world  in  respect  of  sin,  and  of  righteousness,  and  of 
judgment."  The  authority  of  the  Son  of  Man  is  exercised 
by  the  apostolic  ministry,  in  the  power  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  for  the  same  purpose  of  salvation,  with  the  same 
consequence  of  judgment.  "  We  are  a  sweet  savour  of 
Christ  unto  God,"  says  St.  Paul,  "  in  them  that  are  being 
saved,  and  in  them  that  are  perishing  ;  to  the  one  a 
savour  from  death  unto  death  ;  to  the  other  a  savour 
from  life  unto  life."  As  an  Apostle  he  had  power  to 
deal  sharply,  though  the  authority  which  the  Lord  gave 
him  was  for  building  up,  and  not  for  casting  down.^ 

Upon  this  authority  is  based  the  Ministry  of  the  Word  ; 
its  purpose  is  to  communicate  life  eternal  by  conveying 
to  men  the  knowledge  of  God.  Armed  with  this  authority, 
the  Ministers  of  the  Word  are  commissioned  to  make 
disciples.  Discipleship  is  a  relation  to  a  Master;  the 
disciple  is  one  who  learns  from  the  authority  of  a  teacher. 
The    commission    does    not,    however,    extend   to    the 

'  John  iii.  17-19,  36  ;  v.  24,  27  ;  ix.  39  ;  xii.  47  ;  xvi.  8  ; 
xvii.  2-3;  2  Cor.  ii.  15,  16;  xiii.  10. 


236        TJie  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

making  of  many  masters.  The  relation  of  master  and 
disciple  was  familiar  in  Jewish  experience.  It  was  in- 
dividual. The  teacher  was  addressed  by  the  disciple  as 
Rabbi,  My  Chief ;  and  each  one  taught  with  what 
authority  he  had  acquired  by  reputation.  But  this  was 
expressly  forbidden  by  the  Lord :  "  Be  not  ye  called 
Rabbi  :  for  one  is  your  Teacher,  and  all* ye  are  brethren. 
.  .  .  Neither  be  ye  called  masters :  for  one  is  your  Master, 
even  the  Christ."  The  Minister  of  the  Word  is  to  make 
disciples  not  to  himself,  but  to  Jesus  Christ.  It  was  an 
offence  against  this  rule  when  certain  at  Corinth  described 
themselves  as  disciples  of  Paul,  of  Apollos,  of  Cephas. 
"  I  thank  God,"  cries  St.  Paul,  "  that  I  baptized  none  of 
you,  save  Crispus  and  Gaius  ;  lest  any  man  should  say 
that  ye  were  baptized  into  my  name."  He  takes  up  the 
injunction  of  the  Lord,  "  He  that  is  greatest  among  you 
shall  be  your  minister,"  by  asking,  "  What  then  is 
Apollos  ?  and  what  is  Paul  ?  Ministers  through  whom 
ye  believed  :  and  each  as  the  Lord  gave  to  him."  ^ 

So  far  there  is  a  marked  contrast  between  the  Minister 
of  the  Word  and  the  Jewish  teacher.  But  on  the  other 
hand  the  promise  concerning  binding  and  loosing,  made 
by  the  Lord  in  the  first  place  to  St,  Peter  and  afterwards 
to  the  Twelve,  or  perhaps  to  the  Church  at  large,  recalls 
an  ordinary  feature  of  the  Jewish  discipline.  "  No  other 
terms,"  says  Edersheim,  "  were  in  more  constant  use  in 
Rabbinic  Canon  Law  than  those  of  'binding'  and 
'  loosing.'  The  words  are  the  literal  translation  of  the 
Hebrew  equivalents  Asar,  which  means  '  to  bind '  in  the 
sense  of  prohibiting,  and  Hittir,  which  means  '  to  loose  ' 
in  the  sense  of  permitting."  Each  great  teacher  claimed 
this  power  to  bind  or  to  loose,  to  declare  an  act  lawful  or 
unlawful.  The  Lord  used  this  common  form  of  speech 
'  Jas.  iii,  I  :  Matt,  \.\iii.  8-1 1  ;    i  Cur.  i.  12-15  ■   ^''-  5' 


The  Ministry  of  the   Woi-d  237 

in  his  promise  made  to  the  Apostles.  Nor  is  this  ah. 
His  reference  to  Heaven  and  Earth  also  has  a  counter- 
part in  Rabbinic  teaching.  He  approved  the  teaching- 
authority  of  the  Sanhedrin  for  the  time  being.  "  The 
scribes  and  the  Pharisees  sit  on  Moses'  seat :  all  things 
therefore  whatsoever  they  bid  you,  these  do  and  observe." 
A  like  power  he  conferred  for  the  future  on  the  ministry 
of  his  own  Church.  Now  it  was  a  favourite  conceit  of 
the  time  that  there  was  a  heavenly  Sanhedrin,  in  which 
the  decisions  of  the  earthly  Sanhedrin  were  reviewed. 
"  In  regard  to  some  of  their  earthly  decrees,"  says 
Edersheim  again,  "  they  were  wont  to  say  that  the  San- 
hedrin above  confirmed  what  the  Sanhedrin  beneath  had 
done."  The  element  of  truth  contained  in  this  was  com- 
firmed  by  the  Lord  when,  adopting  the  language  of  the 
time,  he  said,  "  What  things  soever  ye  shall  bind  on 
earth  shall  be  bound  in  heaven  :  and  what  things  soever 
ye  shall  loose  on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven."  ^ 

If  therefore  individual  Apostles  and  Ministers  of  the 
AVord  are  not  to  be  called  Rabbi,  or  to  be  many  masters, 
still  they  exercise  collectively  the  power  of  teaching  with 
authority.  "  He  that  heareth  you,  heareth  me,"  said  the 
Lord.  As  the  Jews  were  bound  to  hear  those  who  sat  on 
Moses'  seat,  so  Christians  are  to  hear  the  Church,  One 
consequence  of  refusing  to  hear  is  the  same  in  both  cases  : 
he  who  will  not  hear  the  Church  is  to  be  held  as  the 
Gentile  and  the  publican.'' 

It  is  held  by  some  that  the  power  of  binding  and 
loosing  was  conferred  on  St.  Peter  individually.  This 
does  not  necessarily  follow  from  the  promise  made  to 
him    individually,    since    this    was    the    promise    of  a 

'  Matt.  xvi.  19  ;  xviii.  i8  ;  xxiii.  2,  3.   Edersheim,  Life  an  J  Times 
of  Jesus  the  Messiah,  vol.  ii.  p.  85. 
"  Luke  X.  16  ;  Matt,  xviii,  17. 


238        The  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

future  gift.  It  is  held  again  that  all  the  original  Apostles 
had  this  power  individually,  by  virtue  of  a  special  gift  of 
inspiration.  But  this  does  not  well  agree  with  the 
injunction  against  being  called  masters,  nor  yet  with  the 
practice  of  the  Apostles.  St.  Paul  insisted  strongly  on 
his  individual  mission,  received  directly  from  the  Lord  ; 
yet  he  carefully  watched  over  the  identity  of  his  teaching 
with  that  of  the  other  Apostles,  He  laid  before  them  the 
gospel  which  he  preached,  lest  by  any  means  he  should 
be  running  in  vain.  On  this  or  on  a  similar  occasion 
it  was  that  all  the  Apostles  and  Presbyters  at  Jerusalem 
met,  and  by  solemn  agreement  exercised  the  power  of 
loosing.  "  It  seemed  good  to  the  Holy  Ghost  and  to  us," 
they  said,  to  declare  the  Law  of  Moses  no  longer  binding 
on  converts  from  the  Gentiles.  The  teaching  office  resides 
in  the  whole  Church,  which  acts  by  its  proper  organ  or 
ministry,  the  Ministry  of  the  Word.  Those  who  exercise 
this  ministry,  taken  as  a  whole,  are  for  this  reason  known 
as  the  Ecdcsia  doceiis.  It  is  not  they  alone  who  actually 
teach.  At  various  times  there  have  been  teachers,  recog- 
nized and  honoured  in  the  Church,  who  were  not  of  the 
Ministry.  But  the  Ministers  of  the  Word  are  they  who 
teach  with  authority,  binding  or  loosing.  Individual 
teachers,  whether  of  the  Ministry  or  no,  may  ])ut  forward 
opinions  more  or  less  generally  received  ;  but  they 
declare  with  authority  only  what  the  Church  as  a  whole 
has  taught.^ 

The  matter  of  this  teaching  is  the  Word  of  Christ — all 
that  he  has  commanded.  This  matter  is  commonly 
distinguished  as  pertaining  to  faith  and  morals.  It 
includes  the  facts  of  revelation,  and  the  Christian  rule  of 
life.     St.   Paul  gave  a  charge  to  the  Thessalonians,  how 

'  Gal.  ii.  2  ;  Acts  xv.  28.  At  the  present  day  some  of  the  most 
distinguished  theologians  of  the  Eastern  Church  are  laymen. 


The  Ministry  of  tlie   Word  239 

they  ought  to  walk  and  to  please  God,  which  they  received 
not  as  the  word  of  man,  but  as  it  was  in  truth,  the  Word 
of  God.  The  teaching  oflice  of  the  Church  includes  the 
promulgation  of  the  Divine  Law,  and  the  exercise  of 
authority  in  controversies  of  faith.  The  function  of 
the  Church  is  to  decide  questions  of  faith  or  morals  when 
they  arise,  if  this  be  necessary  for  the  exclusion  of  false 
doctrine.  The  Ministry  of  the  Word  goes  no  further. 
Great  as  are  the  powers  on  which  it  is  founded,  they  are 
to  be  exercised  only  by  way  of  teaching.  The  Jewish 
Sanhedrin,  exercising  the  powers  of  a  theocracy,  could 
enforce  their  decrees  of  binding  and  loosing,  not  only  by 
the  exclusion  of  the  disobedient  from  the  Synagogue, 
as  the  Gentile  or  the  publican,  but  also  in  some  cases 
by  the  punishment  even  of  death.  No  such  power  is 
given  to  the  ministers  of  the  Christian  Church,  the  King- 
dom \vhich  is  not  of  this  world,  and  the  servants  of  which 
must  not  fight.  The  binding  and  loosing  of  the  Christian 
Church  is  declaratory  only.' 

The  Christian  Society,  it  is  true,  has  the  power,  natural 
to  all  societies,  of  making  rules  for  its  members,  which 
by  an  almost  inevitable  necessity  are  digested  into  a  body 
of  Canon  Law.  These  are  to  be  carefully  distinguished 
from  the  Divine  rule  of  life  which  the  Church  declares — 
the  familiar  distinction  oiius  ecdesiastiaun  and  ins  divinum. 
It  is  perhaps  unfortunate  that  both  are  included  in  the 
same  digest.  In  like  manner  the  Church,  or  even  a  self- 
contained  part  of  it,  may  as  a  matter  of  social  discipline 
forbid  or  enjoin  the  teaching  of  certain  opinions  3  but 
this  again  must  be  carefully  distinguished  from  the  power 
of  the  whole  Church  to  define  what  is  matter  of  faith. 
Rules  of  this  kind  do  not  touch  Christian  doctrine,  save 
only  in  regard  to  the  general  principle  of  obedience  to 
'   I  Thess.  ii.  13  ;  iv.  2  ;  John  xviii.  36. 


240        The  E/oiieuts  of  Christian  Doctrine 

authority,'  Yet  once  more  the  Church  has  at  various 
times  received  from  the  Secular  Power  authority  of 
certain  kinds,  the  faculty  of  holding  courts  and  imposing- 
penalties,  the  control  of  certain  branches  of  law,  as  in 
matrimonial  and  testamentary  causes.  This  borrowed 
authority  is  confused  with  the  spiritual  powers  of  the 
Church,  and  has  a  hardening  effect  upon  the  mode  of  their 
exercise.  Conversely  the  Church  has  called  upon  the 
Secular  Power  to  coerce  with  the  sword  of  the  magistrate 
heretics  or  defaulters  from  ecclesiastical  disciple.  The 
result  has  been  disaster  of  a  kind  that  recalls  the  warning 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  to  St.  Peter  :  "  Put  up  again  thy  sword 
into  his  place;  for  all  they  that  take  the  sword  shall 
perish  with  the  sword." 

In  sum,  the  Ministry  of  the  Word  is  the  declaration  of 
revealed  truth  and  of  the  will  of  God,  made  known  by 
Jesus  Christ.  It  is  incumbent  on  the  whole  Church  to 
define  the  rule  of  faith  and  morals,  where  definition  is 
needed.  It  is  incumbent  on  every  several  church,  as  a 
pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth,  to  maintain  what  is  so 
defined.  It  is  the  duty  of  every  several  minister  of  the 
Word  to  declare  the  whole  counsel  of  God,  having  regard 
to  the  capacity  of  those  to  whom  he  is  sent — feeding  the 
simple,  as  babes  in  Christ,  with  milk,  those  that  are  full- 
grown  with  solid  food,  speaking  wisdom  among  the 
perfect.  He  must  utter  opinion  as  opinion,  that  which 
is  of  faith  as  of  faith,  handling  aright  the  Word  of  truth. 
Ambassador  of  Christ,  he  is  to  preach  not  himself,  but 
Christ  Jesus  as  Lord." 

'  For  tlie  further  consideration  of  wli.it  is  involved  in  "hearing 
the  Church,"  see  below,  pp.  282-5. 

*  Acts  XX.  27 ;  I  Cor.  ii.  6 ;  iii.  2  ;  2  Cor.  iv.  5  ;  v.  20 ; 
I  Tim.  iii.  15  ;  2  Tim.  ii.  15  ;  Ilel).  v.  13,  14. 


The  Ministry  of  the  Sacraments  241 

Sect.  N .—The  Miiiistry  of  the  Sacraments 

"  Let  a  man  so  account  of  us,"  wrote  St.  Paul,  "  as  of 
ministers  of  Christ,  and  stewards  of  the  mysteries  of  God." 
This  relation  is  continued  in  the  ministry  of  the  Church. 
"  The  bishoji  must  be  blameless,  as  God's  steward."  A 
steward  is  the  servant  who  has  the  care  of  his  master's 
house ;  he  receives  and  dispenses  ;  he  rules  the  under- 
servants,  and  controls  even  the  children  of  his  lord.  In 
the  household  of  God  there  are  stewards,  and  the  goods 
which  they  guard  and  dispense  are  the  mysteries  of 
God." 

AVe  retain  here  the  Greek  word.  Mysteries,  in  ordinary 
Greek  parlance,  were  religious  ceremonies,  to  which  none 
were  admitted  but  those  who  had  been  solemnly  initiated. 
Such  were  the  famous  mysteries  of  the  Cabiri  in  Samo- 
thrace,  of  Demeter  at  Eleusis.  Rites  of  the  same  kind 
were  commonly  found  in  all  Greek  cities.  They  seem 
to  have  invariably  included  a  solemn  purification  from 
sin,  even  if  this  were  not,  as  some  have  thought,  the 
primary  object  of  the  whole  ceremony.  It  is  doubtful 
whether  any  important  secrets  of  religion  or  nature  were 
revealed  to  the  initiated,  but  this  was  certainly  pretended, 
and  the  proceedings  at  least  were  secret ;  to  know  them 
was  a  high  privilege,  and  to  speak  of  them  to  those  with- 
out was  a  great  impiety.  Such  is  the  trae  meaning  of 
Mysteries;  but  the  word  passed  into  a  more  general 
sense.  The  obscure  doctrines  of  certain  natural  philo- 
sophers were,  perhaps  in  jest,  called  by  Plato  mysteries. 
The  word  was  used  even  of  an  ordinary  secret  between 
man  and  man.- 

'   I  Cor.  iv.  I  ;  Tit.  i.  7  ;  Luke  xii.  42  ;  Gal.  iv.  2. 
-  Plato,  Tfieact..,   156  A.     The  line  of  Menancler,  /xvo-r-fjpiSv  aov 
fir]  KareliTTis  Ttji  </)iA<jd,  does  not  however  establish  a  general  use. 

R 


242        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

In  the  Septuagint  the  word  is  used  with  both  meanings. 
It  stands  for  the  secret  counsel  of  a  king ;  in  the  Book  of 
Wisdom,  the  Gentile  religion  is  summed  ujd  as  consisting 
of  mysteries  and  initiations,  while  on  the  other  hand  the 
religion  of  Israel  is  spoken  of,  in  the  phrase  aftenvards 
used  by  St.  Paul,  as  the  Mysteries  of  God  ;  in  the  Book 
of  Daniel  the  dreams  of  Nebuchadnezzar  are  called 
mysteries.^ 

It  is  never  safe  to  ignore  the  witness  of  the  Septuagint 
to  the  meaning  of  the  words  used  in  the  New  Testament, 
but  in  this  case  little  is  to  be  drawn  from  this  source. 
Mysteries  were  inconsistent  with  the  Jewish  economy,  in 
which  the  worship  of  God  was  public  to  the  whole  nation. 
Philo  rails  at  the  Gentile  mysteries,  pointing  to  the  open- 
ness of  nature  as  the  model  to  be  followed.  He 
contrasts  with  them  the  Jewish  sacrifices  founded  on  the 
exactly  opposite  principle.  To  the  Mysteries  none  were 
admitted  but  the  initiated ;  from  the  worship  of  Israel 
none  were  excluded  but  the  unclean. ^  The  use  of  the 
word  by  St.  Paul  is  therefore  the  more  remarkable,  and 
it  is  the  more  decisively  connected  with  the  ideas  current 
in  the  Greek-speaking  societies  among  which  he  moved. 

There  is  a  record  in  the  Gospel  of  one  occasion  when 
the  word  was  used  by  the  Lord  himself.  To  the  Twelve 
it  was  given,  he  said,  to  know  the  mysteries  of  the  King- 
dom of  Heaven,  but  to  others  the  truth  was  obscurely 
told  in  parables.  There  is  nothing  here  to  suggest  any 
meaning  beyond  that  of  a  secret  revealed  to  some,  but 
as  yet  withheld  from  others.  By  St.  Paul  the  falling 
away  of  Israel  and  the  admission  of  the  Gentiles  to  the 
Church  is  called  a  mystery.     He  seems  here  to  mean  a 

'  Tob.  xii.  7;  Judith  ii.  2;  Wisd.  ii.  22;  xiv.  15.  23; 
Uan.  ii.  18  ;  iv.  6. 

^  Philo,  Trepi  OvofTwi',  C/. ,  pp.  856,  857. 


The  Ministry  of  the  Sacraments  243 

secret  purpose  of  God,  which  was  gradually  being  revealed 
as  it  came  into  effect.  Apparently  in  the  same  sense  the 
finishing  of  the  mystery  of  God  is  spoken  of  in  the 
Apocalypse.  So,  too,  the  revelation  of  an  event  wholly 
future,  as  of  the  resurrection,  is  a  mystery.^ 

There  remain  passages  in  which  St.  Paul  uses  the 
word  according  to  its  primary  sense.  In  one  of  his 
earliest  epistles  he  wrote  of  the  "  mystery  of  lawlessness." 
The  allusion  is  of  noted  obscurity ;  but  this  much  is 
clear,  that  he  is  speaking  of  a  religious  system  which  stands 
in  rivalry  with  the  truth  of  God.  Elsewhere  he  uses  the 
word  only  of  the  Christian  religion.  To  the  Corinthians 
he  describes  himself  as  a  steward  of  the  mysteries  of 
God.  In  the  same  Epistle  he  uses  language  that  could 
convey  only  one  meaning  to  the  reader  :  "  We  speak 
wisdom  among  the  perfect  .  .  .  we  speak  God's  wisdom 
in  a  mystery."  This  could  not  fail  to  suggest  the  familiar 
idea  of  initiation  into  the  secret  rites  of  the  Mysteries. 
There  was  therefore  something  strictly  analogous  in  the 
Christian  religion.^ 

In  the  later  epistles  to  the  Ephesians  and  the  Colossians 
the  word  is  frequent,  and  here  again  the  idea  of  steward- 
ship is  prominent.  "  I  was  made  a  minister  of  the 
Church,"  says  the  Apostle,  "  according  to  the  stewardship 
of  God  which  was  given  me  to  you-ward,  to  fulfil  the 

'  Matt.  xiii.  ii,  and  the  corresponding  passages,  Mark  iv.  ii  ; 
Luke  viii.  lo.  Rom.  xi.  25,  26  ;  Eph.  iii.  3-6  ;  Rev.  x.  7  ; 
I  Cor.  XV.  51. 

*  2  Thess.  ii.  7  (cf.  Rev.  xvii.  5)  ;  l  Cor.  ii.  6,  7:  ivTo7s  reAeiois, 
i.e.  those  wiio  are  TereAeo-jueVof,  or  initiated  into  the  reAr;  or  TeAeral, 
the  rites  of  the  Mysteries.  The  "  wisdom  of  the  rulers  of  this 
world  "  is  probably  an  allusion  to  the  pagan  Mysteries  (cf.  Eph. 
vi.  12),  with  which  the  Christian  Mysteries  are  thus  parallelled  and 
contrasted,  as  the  Christian  sacrifice  with  pagan  sacrifices  in  i  Cor. 
X.  21. 


244        riic  Elements  of  Christian  Doctyine 

word  of  God,  the  mystery  which  liath  been  hid  from  all 
ages  and  generations  ;  but  now  hath  it  been  manifested 
to  his  saints,  to  whom  God  was  pleased  to  make  known 
what  is  the  riches  of  the  glory  of  this  mystery  among  the 
Gentiles,  which  is  Christ  in  you,  the  hope  of  glory."  His 
work  was  "  to  make  all  men  see  what  is  the  stewardship 
of  the  mystery  which  from  all  ages  hath  been  hid  in  God, 
who  created  all  things."  He  prays  for  boldness  in 
making  known  the  mystery  of  the  Gospel.  In  writing 
to  Timothy  he  speaks  of  the  mystery  of  the  faith,  and 
the  mystery  of  godliness,  which  exactly  contrasts  with 
the  mystery  of  lawlessness  described  in  earlier  years. 
This  mystery  of  godliness  is  the  sum  of  the  Christian 
religion  :  "  He  who  was  manifested  in  the  fiesh,  justified 
in  the  Spirit,  seen  of  angels,  preached  among  the  nations, 
believed  on  in  the  world,  received  up  in  glory."  He 
calls  it  a  "  great  mystery,"  suggesting  the  distinction 
of  the  great  and  the  little  mysteries  of  Greek  institu- 
tion. In  the  same  way  he  describes  marriage  as  a 
"  great  mystery." ' 

St.  Paul  therefore  employs  language  plainly  indicating 
that  in  the  Christian  religion  there  is  something  analogous 
to  the  religion  of  the  Greek  mysteries.  There  are 
ceremonies  and  rites  to  be  approached  only  by  a  cere- 
monial initiation.  This  being  established,  we  can  hardly 
understand  in  any  other  sense  the  Mysteries  of  the 
Kingdom  of  Heaven,  which  are  spoken  of  in  the  Gospel, 
and  these  would  unquestionably  be  included  in  the  things 
concerning  the  Kingdom  about  which  the  Lord  instructed 
the    Apostles   after   his    resurrection.     These    are    the 

'  Eph.  i.  9  ;  iii.  9  ;  v.  32  ;  vi.  19  ;  Col.  i.  25-27  ;  ii.  2  ;  iv.  3  ; 
I  Tim.  iii.  9,  16.  At  Eleusis  the  initiated  passed  through  rh.  /xiKpa 
teAtj  to  TO.  fj.eya.\a.  See  the  Schol.  on  Plato,  Gor^ias,  497  C. 
Compare  also  the  alhisive  use  of  juf /uurj/iat  in  Phil.  iv.  12. 


The  Ministry  of  the  Sacraments  245 

Mysteries  of  God,  committed  to  the  stewardship  ot"  the 
Christian  Ministry.  They  are  much  more  than  rites  and 
ceremonies.  They  have  the  reahty  after  which  the  pagan 
mystagogues  were  dimly  feehng,  the  purification  of  the 
soul,  the  gift  of  communion  with  God.  The  Christian 
Mysteries  mean  the  dwelling  of  Christ  in  his  people,  the 
hope  of  glory.  They  are  the  ritual  and  ceremonial 
expression  of  the  fulfilment  of  God's  secret  purpose  from 
the  foundation  of  the  world,  the  redemption  and  the 
sanctification  of  all  men  hy  the  Incarnate  Word,  They 
are  divinely  appointed  signs  of  this  Redemption  that  is 
heing  wrought,  of  grace  that  is  being  given  ;  and  since 
with  God,  who  calls  the  things  that  are  not  as  though 
they  were,  to  signify  that  a  thing  is  being  done  is  all 
one  with  the  doing,  they  are  therefore  signs  which  effect 
that  which  they  signify.' 

In  the  older  Latin  version  of  the  Scriptures  the  Greek 
word  niysterium  was  rendered,  in  the  whole  range  of  its 
meaning,  by  sacramcnttiin.  In  the  later  revision,  perfected 
by  the  labours  of  St,  Jerome,  the  word  mystcrhun  is 
more  commonly  retained."  The  former  use,  however, 
corresponds  to  the  practice  of  Latin  writers  during 
several  centuries.  With  Tertullian  sacramcniuin  nostrum 
means  the  Christian  religion  as  a  whole.  The  esoteric 
tradition   which   some    heretics    opi)osed    to   the    public 

'  The  habitual  use  of  the  word  ^utrr^pioi/  and  its  cognates  by  the 
Greek  Fathers  leaves  no  room  for  doubt  as  to  its  meaning  for  Chris- 
tians. See  the  examples  in  Bingliam,  I.  iv.,  and  add  to  these  the 
Mystagogic  Catechism  of  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  which  is  instruction 
for  those  who  are  advancing  from  baptism  to  to.  Oeiorepa  ^variipia. 

■  The  texts  in  which  the  Vulgate  has  sacramentum  are  Dan. 
ii.  18  ;  iv.  6  ;  Tob.  xii.  7  ;  Wisd.  ii.  22  ;  Eph.  i.  9  ;  iii,  3,  9  ;  v.  32; 
I  Tim.  iii.  16 ;  Rev.  i.  20.  The  selection  seems  to  be  quite 
arbitrary,  and  does  not  indicate  any  appropriation  of  the  word  to 
a  specific  sense. 


246        Tlie  Elements  of  CJiristian  Doctrine 

teaching  of  the  Church  he  scornfully  calls  a  "  hidden 
sacramejitP  The  clergy  of  Rome  wrote  to  St.  Cyprian 
that  "  the  whole  sacrament  of  faith  is  set  forth  in  the 
confession  of  the  Name  of  Christ."  By  St.  Cyprian 
himself  the  word  is  constantly  used  in  this  way ;  the 
most  familiar  example  being  his  phrase  sacramcntum 
unitatis  for  the  mystery  or  revealed  truth  of  the  unity  of 
the  Church.  In  St.  Leo  the  Great  we  find  the  sacrament 
of  the  Incarnation,  and  much  later  in  Isidore  of  Seville 
the  sacrament  of  the  Trinity.  Lactantius  uses  the  word 
of  the  truths  obscurely  revealed  in  the  Sibylline  verses.^ 

Side  by  side  with  these  expressions  we  find  the  word 
in  constant  use  for  the  sacred  rites  of  the  Church.  In 
either  use  it  is  to  be  regarded  purely  as  the  equivalent 
of  fnysteritim,  and  its  meaning  is  determined  by  that  of 
the  Greek  word,  as  used  in  the  New  Testament.  We 
are  not  concerned  with  the  sense  in  which  it  was  employed 
by  Latin  writers  who  were  not  Christian.  For  them  a 
sacramentnm  was  either  a  pledge  deposited  for  surety  in 
a  court  of  justice,  or  an  oath,  and  especially  the  soldier's 
oath  of  obedience.  The  former  use  of  the  word  has 
coloured  some  definitions  of  the  Christian  Sacraments;  the 
latter,  in  connection  with  St.  Paul's  imagery  of  the  Chris- 
tian warfare,  has  afforded  opportunities  for  a  i)lay  upon 
words.  Neither  helps  us  to  understand  what  meaning 
the  Church  of  the  first  age  found  in  the  word  mysteriuni. 
St.  Augustine  would  seem,  however,  to  be  indicating  a 
current  use  of  the  Latin  word  where  he  says  that  signs 
or  symbolical  actions,  "  when  they  appertain  to  Divine 
things,  are  called  sacramentaT  Latin  literature  yields  no 
example  of  sucli  use,  but  it  may  have  been  established  in 

'  Tertull.,  Apot.fC.  15;  De  Praescy.,c.  20,26.  Cypr.,  i?/.,  xx\. 
§  3;  Z>^  Utnt.  Ercl.,  c.  7.  Leo  M.,  Serin.,  xxiv.  4.  Isid.  Ilisp., 
Confm  /inf.,  i.  4.      l.nctantius,  vii.  24. 


The  Ministry  of  the  Sacraments  247 

the  popular  language.  In  that  case  the  appropriation  of 
the  word  to  the  Christian  Mysteries  would  seem  to  show 
that  what  was  chiefly  regarded  in  them  was  that  element 
of  significatio?i,  which  underlies  the  Greek  term ;  and  so 
we  are  helped  to  understand  the  meaning  of  St.  Paul.^ 

The  sacred  ceremonies  and  rites  used  in  the  Chris- 
tian Church  are  obviously  not  all  of  equal  importance. 
St.  Augustine  observed  the  fewness  of  those  which  are 
of  palmary  significance,  "  Baptism  in  the  Name  of 
the  Trinity,  the  Communion  of  the  Body  and  Blood 
of  Christ,  and  whatever  else  is  appointed  in  Holy 
Scripture,"  To  these  few  the  name  of  Sacrament  was 
gradually  restricted.  The  dividing  line  was  supplied 
by  the  emphasis  laid  upon  the  doctrine  of  grace;  and 
those  sacraments  were  distinguished  which  were  expressly 
connected  with  the  gift  of  sanctification.  Among  these 
Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  are  eminent.  The 
institution  of  these  two  alone,  with  their  proper  form,  is 
recorded  by  the  holy  evangelists,  and  they  have  therefore 
been  called  by  way  of  distinction  the  Sacraments  of 
the  Gospel.  It  was  long  before  there  was  any  clear 
demarcation  of  other  Sacraments.  Early  in  the  twelfth 
century  Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  in  his  great  work  De  Sacra- 
inejitis  Chnstianae  Fidei,  still  adhered  to  the  wider  sense 
of  the  word.  Some  few  years  later  Peter  Lombard 
specified  seven — the  rites  of  Baptism,  Confirmation,  the 
Eucharist,  Penance,  the  Unction  of  the  Sick,  Ordina- 
tion, and  Marriage — as  being  in  a  peculiar  sense  the 
Sacraments  of  the  New  Testament.  The  dominating 
influence  of  his  work  as  a  text-book  in  the  mediaeval 
schools  secured  the  general  acceptance  of  this  classifica- 
tion, which  found  no  less  favour  in  the  Eastern  Church 
than  in  the  \\'est,  and  the  meaning  of  the  word  Sacrament 
'  See  Note  M. 


24'S        The  Elements  of  C/iristiaii  Doctrine 

in  common  use  has  been  narrowed  from  its  former  ex- 
tension so  as  to  include  no  other  rites  but  these.' 

This  distinction  of  the  seven  Sacraments,  commonly 
so  called,  is  purely  theological.  Certain  rites  are  observed 
to  be  ordinary  means  appointed  by  God  for  the  con- 
veyance to  the  soul  of  sanctifying  grace.  To  these  the 
general  term  mystery  or  sacrament  is  reserved  in  a 
special  sense.  The  distinction  is  convenient  so  long  as 
we  are  careful  to  remember  the  more  general  sense 
of  the  word.  The  seven  are  specially  marked,  by  the 
evidence  of  Holy  Scripture  and  Christian  tradition,  as 
means  of  grace. 

The  elementary  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments,  thus 
narrowly  understood,  is  very  simple.  Treated  theo- 
logically it  is  the  subject  of  endless  complications. 
These  we  put  aside  for  the  most  part,  noting  only  some 
questions  which  are  practically  unavoidable. 

The  first  is  the  question  of  matter  and  form.  A 
Sacrament,  being  a  sign,  must  be  an  object  of  sense. 
In  what  does  the  sensible  sign  consist?  St.  Augustine 
says,  in  well-known  words  which  will  hardly  bear 
translation,  "  accedit  verbum  ad  elementum,  et  fit 
sacramentum."  He  is  speaking  of  baptism.  The  water 
of  baptism,  in  itself,  is  mere  water  and  nothing  more. 
But  when  used  in  conjunction  with  the  "  word  of  faith," 
the  declaration  of  what  is  done  in  the  Name  of  the  Holy 
Trinity,  it  has  power  to  cleanse  the  soul.  The  element 
and  the  word  together  make  the  Sacrament.-     In  a  later 

'  K\xg.,Ep.  54,  ad laniiar.,  §  i :  "  Saciamcntis  numeio  paucissimis, 
observatione  facillimis,  signilicatione  praestantissimis,  societateni 
novi  populi  colligavit,  sicut  est  baptisiiuis  Trinitatis  nomine  consc- 
cratiis,  coniniiinicatio  Corjioris  et  Sanguinis  ipsius,  el  si  quid  alind 
in  ScriiUuris  canonicis  comniendatuv."     Pelr.  Lonib. ,  Si-ii/.,  iv.  §  i. 

*  Aug.,  Tract.  80,  in  loan.,  §  3.     Commenting  on  John  xv.   3, 


The  Ministry  of  the   Sacraments  249 

age  this  sentence  was  read  as  describing  tlie  nature  of  a 
Sacrament  in  general.  An  element  of  some  kind,  and 
a  word^  that  is  to  say,  a  fixed  formula,  were  taken  to  be 
essential.  When  the  peripatetic  philosophy  invaded  the 
schools,  and  everything  existing  in  nature  was  analysed 
into  matter  and  form,  the  constitution  of  a  Sacrament 
seemed  to  be  assured ;  the  element  was  the  matter,  the 
word  was  the  form.  Great  ingenuity  was  spent  in 
applying  this  principle  to  the  other  Sacraments,  with 
doubtful  success.  As  eventually  modified,  however,  the 
distinction  has  become  useful,  and  is  now  thoroughly 
established  in  theological  language.  By  the  matter  of  a 
Sacrament  we  understand  either  a  tangible  thing  or  an 
action,  as  water,  oil,  or  the  imposition  of  hands.  Taken 
in  itself  this  thing,  or  this  action,  may  have  various 
significations  ;  its  signification  in  the  Sacrament  is  deter- 
mined by  accompanying  words,  which  are  called  the 
form.  The  two  together  make  up  the  sensible  and 
intelligible  sign  which  is  the  Sacrament. 

For  such  a  sign  to  be  an  effectual  conveyance  of  grace 
it  must  be  appointed  by  the  Author  of  grace ;  in  the 
words  of  the  English  Catechism,  it  must  be  "  ordained 
by  Christ  himself."  This  ordinance  may  be  either 
specific,  as  in  Baptism  and  to  a  less  degree  in  the  Lord's 
Supper,  or  generic,  as  perhaps  in  the  case  of  Ordination, 
the  rite  or  outward  sign  of  which,  so  far  as  we  know, 
was    not    particularly  specified.      The  determination  of 

he  says,  "Quaie  noii  ait,  innndi  cstis  propter  baptismum,  tjuo  loti 
esiis,  sed  ait,  propter  verbnm,  quod  locittus  sum  vobis,  nisi  quia 
et  in  aqua  verbum  mundat  ?  Delrahe  veihum,  et  quid  est  aqua 
nisi  aqua  ?  Accedit  verbum  ad  elementum,  et  fit  saciamentuni, 
eliani  ipsum  tanquam  visibile  verbum.  .  .  .  Hoc  est  verbum  fidei  quod 
praedicamus,  quo  sine  dubio,  ut  mundare  possit,  consecralur  et 
baptismus." 


250        Tlie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

the  matter  and  form  will  in  the  latter  case  rest  with  the 
Church  at  large,  or,  it  may  be,  even  with  the  individual 
dispenser  of  the  Sacrament.^ 

The  second  question  that  must  be  considered  is  that 
of  the  minister.  In  a  Sacrament  something  is  done  by 
God's  appointment.  There  must  be  a  doer,  also 
appointed  by  God,  a  steward  or  dispenser  of  the  grace 
given.  The  question  of  appointment  is  best  determined 
by  the  practice  of  the  Church.  Those  who  are 
recognized  by  actual  custom  as  dispensers  of  a  Sacra- 
ment have  a  right  which  cannot  be  challenged.  The 
power  of  any  others  to  act  in  the  same  capacity  will  at 
best  be  doubtful. 

Our  third  question  concerns  the  intention  of  the 
minister,  about  which  there  has  been  much  darkening  of 
counsel.  The  minister  is  a  man ;  his  action  is  a  true 
human  action.  It  must  therefore  be  directed  by  some 
purpose,  upon  which  its  nature  will  in  a  measure 
depend.  To  wash  a  child  for  the  purpose  of  cleansing 
its  skin  is  not  the  same  action  as  to  wash  it  in  Holy 
Baptism,  and  cannot  be  the  action  required  to  constitute 
the  Sacrament.  From  two  opposite  points  of  view  it  has 
been  maintained  that  if  the  proper  form  and  matter  of  a 
Sacrament  be  used,  even  in  jest,  the  Sacrament  is  com- 
plete. Luther  held  this  because  of  his  opinion  that  a 
Sacrament  works  purely  by  exciting  motions  of  faith  in 
the  recipient,  which  might  be  the  result  even  of  a  profane 
jest.  Others  have  been  led  to  the  same  conclusion  from 
an  exaggeration  of  the  truth  that  a  Sacrament  depends 
on  what  is  done  by  God's  appointment,  not  on  the  doer 

'  Innocent  IV.,  in  his  ciimmentary  on  the  Decretals,  lib.  i.  tit. 
iG,  maintained  that,  subject  to  the  determination  of  the  Church, 
"sufticeret  ordinalori  dicere  sis  sacrnfos,  vel  alia  aequipollentia 
verlia." 


TJie  Ministry  of  the  Sacraments  251 

or  the  recipient.  But  this  makes  the  action  of  the 
minister  no  true  human  action,  and  reduces  the  Sacra- 
ment to  something  less  than  a  magical  charm.  The 
often-quoted  story  of  an  actor  converted  in  the  moment 
of  a  mock-baptism  on  the  stage,  and  led  thence  to 
martyrdom,  proves  nothing,  even  if  true ;  for  this  would 
be  an  extraordinary,  not  an  ordinary,  operation  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  The  truth  is  commonly  expressed  by  saying 
that  he  who  administers  a  Sacrament  must  intend  to  do 
what  the  Church  does.  He  must  act  intentionally  as 
minister.  Can  he  then  by  a  careless,  ignorant,  or  deliberate 
misdirection  of  his  will  destroy  the  value  of  the  Sacra- 
ment which  he  administers  ?  It  has  been  held  that  he 
can  do  so ;  but  intolerable  consequences  follow.  We 
are  shut  up,  it  has  been  said,  in  a  dungeon  of  uncertainty ; 
no  man  can  be  assured  of  the  reality  of  any  Sacrament 
that  he  receives,  and  the  very  purpose  of  an  outward 
and  visible  sign  is  frustrated.  The  suggestion  is  met  by 
considering  that  the  minister,  by  the  very  fact  that  he  is 
a  minister,  a  servant  of  another,  acts  not  in  his  own  name 
but  in  the  name  of  his  master.  If  with  the  obvious 
intention  of  acting  ministerially  he  do  what  is  appointed, 
there  need  be  no  further  question.  The  result  issues 
ex  opere  operato,  from  what  is  done  by  God's  appoint- 
ment ;  not  ex  opere  operantis,  from  anything  which  the 
minister  does  of  himself.  It  does  not  depend  upon  his 
belief  or  opinion,  his  purpose  or  will,  but  solely  upon  his 
ministerial  action. ^ 

A  fourth  and  last  question  concerns  the  effect  of  a 
Sacrament.  The  Sacraments  are  called  effectual  signs  of 
grace,  because  they  produce,  by  the  working  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  what  they  signify.  We  have  already  considered 
the  doctrine  of  grace,  the  meaning  of  the  gift,  its  eftect 
'  See  Note  N. 


252        The  Rleineiits  of  CJtristian  Doctrine 

upon  the  soul,  and  the  hindering  of  that  eftect  through 
lack  of  response  in  the  subject.  This  must  all  be  under- 
stood as  we  speak  of  the  Sacraments,  the  special  grace 
given  through  each  of  them  being  noted. 

We  may  now  briefly  consider  under  these  four  heads 
what  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments  taken  severally. 

In  Baptism  the  matter  is  water,  in  which  the  subject  is 
bathed  or  washed  by  affusion ;  the  form  is  a  declaration 
that  the  subject  is  baptized  in  the  Name  of  the  Father 
and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  This  use  of  the 
Name  is  expressly  commanded  by  the  Lord ;  the  words 
indicating  the  action  may  be  indifferently  "  I  baptize 
thee,"  as  in  the  Western  Church,  or  "  Such  an  one  is 
baptized,"  as  everywhere  in  the  East.  The  effect  of 
Baptism  is  the  remission  of  sin  by  a  mystical  death,  and 
the  gift  of  new  life  by  regeneration.  All,  says  St.  Paul, 
who  are  baptized  into  Christ  Jesus  are  baptized  into  his 
death ;  entrance  into  the  Kingdom  of  God  is  by  the  new 
birth  of  water  and  the  Spirit.^ 

The  ordinary  minister  of  Baptism  was  from  the  first  one 
of  the  local  bishops  or  presbyters,  to  whom  this  ministry 
was  given  by  the  Apostles.  From  the  time  of  St,  Ignatius 
it  was  in  the  hands  of  the  Bishop,  as  now  understood,  or 
of  a  presbyter  or  deacon  at  his  appointment.'-  In  case, 
however,  of  extraordinary  need,  any  person  may  ad- 
minister Baptism ;  and  if  it  be  irregularly  done  without 
such  need  by  any  unauthorized  person,  the  fact  holds  good 
if  the  proper  matter  and  form  are  used.     It  was  strongly 

'   Rom.  vi.  3  ;  John  iii.  5. 

^  I  Cor.  i.  17.  Ign.,  Ad  Smyrn.,  8  :  ovk  i^Svicmv  x^P^^  '''"^  fina-KSirou 
ai/Tf  ^airri^fiv  oijre  aydirriv  irotelu.  Tertull.,  Dc'  l^aptismo,  c.  17  : 
"Dandi  [bnptismuin]  quidem  habet  ius  siinimus  sacerdos,  qui  est 
episcopus,  dehinc  presbyteri  et  diaconi,  non  tanien  sine  episcopi 
auctorilate." 


Tlie  Miuistiy  of  the  Sacrauieiits  253 

maintained  by  St.  Cyprian,  witli  the  African  bishops  and 
the  greater  part  of  the  East,  that  the  minister  of  Baptism 
must  be  in  communion  with  the  Church.  They  rejected 
Baptism  performed  by  a  heretic  as  invahd.  The 
tradition,  however,  has  prevailed  that  any  person,  of  any 
opinion  or  condition  whatsoever,  can  minister  true 
Baptism,  the  appointed  action  being  duly  observed 
according  to  the  institution  of  Christ. 

Confirmation  is  the  ritual  complement  of  Baptism.'  Its 
effect,  which  is  commonly  described  as  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  does  not  differ  essentially  from  that  of 
Baptism,  being  the  extension  and  completion  of  the  gift 
of  new  life  then  bestowed.  About  the  matter  of  Con- 
firmation there  are  two  opinions.  It  is  either  Imposition 
of  hands,  or  the  sacred  Chrism,  an  unguent  compounded 
of  oil  and  balsam.  We  read  of  the  Apostles  laying  their 
hands  on  the  baptized  for  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
St.  Cyprian  calls  baptism  and  the  imposition  of  hands  the 
two  sacraments  by  which  men  are  sanctified  and  made 
the  sons  of  God.^  On  the  other  hand  it  can  hardly  be 
doubted  that  unction  was  in  common  use  for  the 
initiation  of  Christians  in  the  time  of  the  Apostles. 
They  allude  to  it  in  exactly  the  same  way  as  to  the 
washing  of  Baptism.  "  He  that  anointed  us  is  God,"  says 
St.  Paul.  "  The  anointing  which  ye  received  of  him," 
says  St.   John,  "  abideth  in  you."     This  may   possibly 

'  Hence  the  name.  In  the  Roman  Ordiiies  oi  \\\e.  eighth  century 
(oufirmarc  aliqiicin  is  to  minister  the  chalice,  completing  the  rite  of 
Communion. 

-  Acts  viii.  17  ;  xix.  6.  Cypr.,  Ep.  12. :  "  Parum  sit  eis  manus 
imponere  ad  accipiendum  Spiritum  sanctum,  nisi  accipiant  et 
ecclesiae  baptismum.  Tunc  enim  demum  plena  sanctificari  et  esse 
tilii  Dei  possunt,  si  sacramento  utroque  nascantur  "  (Ilartel,  p.  775). 
Nemosianus  spoke  in  the  same  terms  at  the  council  of  Carthage 
on  rebaptism  {ibid.,  p.  439). 


254        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

refer  to  a  preliminary  anointing  such  as  was  afterwards 
used  in  making  catechumens,  which  is  not  reckoned  a 
sacrament  in  the  narrower  sense/  But  TertuUian 
mentions  both  the  unction  and  the  imposition  of  hands 
following  immediately  on  Baptism,  and  by  later  writers 
the  two  ceremonies  are  frequently  thus  coupled.  Of 
the  eighty-seven  bishops  who  gave  their  judgments 
in  St.  Cyprian's  council  at  Carthage  on  the  question 
of  heretical  baptism,  no  one  mentions  unction,  while 
many  refer  to  the  imposition  of  hands  ;  but  in  the 
letter  issued  by  some  of  them  after  the  council  they  speak 
of  the  chrism  after  Baptism  as  necessary,  that  a  man 
may  have  in  him  the  grace  of  Christ.  In  later  years  the 
opinion  that  chrism  is  the  matter  of  the  Sacrament  so  far 
prevailed  that  the  imposition  of  hands  ceased  entirely 
in  the  East,  and  partly  in  the  West.  Eugenius  IV.  at  the 
council  of  Florence  instructed  the  Armenians  that  Con- 
firmation by  chrism  had  been  substituted  for  the 
apostolic  imposition  of  hands,  but  his  statement  has  no 
value  as  a  tradition.  The  conclusion  seems  impera- 
tive that  either  matter  is  sufficient.  Confirmation  is 
ministered  by  a  Bishop,  either  mediately,  as  in  the  East, 
through  the  chrism  which  he  has  consecrated,  or 
immediately  by  his  own  hand,  as  with  rare  exceptions  in 
the  West.^ 

The  Sacrament  of  Penance  is  a  formal  exercise  of  the 

'  2  Cor.  i.  21  ;  i  John  ii.  20,  27.  Compare  i  Cor.  vi.  11  ;  Eph. 
V.  26;    Heb.  X.  22. 

«  Tertull.,  De  Baptismo,  c.  7,  8.  Cypr.,  Ep.  70  (Hartel,  p.  76S) : 
"  Ungi  quoque  necesse  est  eum  qui  baptizatus  est,  ut  accepto 
chrismate  id  est  unctionc  esse  unctus  Dei  et  habere  in  se  gratiam 
Christipossit."  Eugen.  IV.,  Deer,  ad  Arvunos :  "  Loco  autem  illius 
manus  impositionis,  datur  in  ecclesia  confirmatio."  This,  like  the 
rest  of  his  teaching  about  the  Sacraments,  is  drawn  from  the 
Opusculum  quartum  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas. 


The  Mi7iistry  of  the  Sacraments  255 

power  given  by  the  Lord  to  the  Church  in  the  words, 
"Whose    soever    sins    ye    forgive,    they    are    forgiven 
unto  them."     It  is  doubtful  how  far  in  the  first  age  this 
was     distinguished     in     practice    from    the    penitential 
discipline    by    which    the    Christian    Society    excludes 
notorious  evil-doers  from  its  privileges,  and  restores  them 
to  the  peace  of  the  Church  on  repentance.    As  in  Baptism 
there  is  the  double  effect  of  cleansing  the  soul  from  sin 
and  of  incorporating  the  baptized  in  the  society  of  the 
Church,  so  a  ritual  act  of  penance  may  at  once  relieve 
the   soul  of  guilt  and  restore  the  penitent  to  his  place 
among   the    faithful.      But   sins    which   do   not   involve 
notorious  exclusion  from  Christian  communion  may  still 
be  treated  by  the  Sacrament  of  Penance.     Penitential 
discipline  may  be  varied  by  the  Church.     It  has  been 
varied  from  the  extreme  of  severity  to   the  extreme  of 
laxity ;  but  this  does  not  alter  the  effect  of  sin  upon  the 
spiritual  condition  of  the  soul,  or  the  burden  upon  the 
conscience  of  the  sinner.     We  have  considered  this  in 
dealing  with  the  doctrine  of  Eternal  Life.     It  may  suffice 
to  say  here  that  what  was  done  in  Baptism  is  restored 
m  Penance,  in  both  cases  alike,  as  St.   Ambrose  says, 
by  the    ministry  of   man,    with    the    same   sacramental 
efificacy.     The  Son  of  Man  has   authority    on  earth    to 
forgive  sins,  and  he  has  continued  his  mission  by  leaving 
power  to  his    Church  to  absolve  all  sinners  who  truly 
repent.     The  promise  of  assured  pardon  is  to  those  who 
confess  their  sins,  and  in  the  language  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment  confession   never  means  anything  else  but  open 
acknowledgment  before  men.     The  word  of  absolution 
can  be  pronounced  upon  such  confession,  whether  it  be 
made  publicly  in  the  presence  of  the  Church,  or  more 
privately  before  a  single  minister  of  the  Church.     The 
practice  of  the  whole  Church  for  many  centuries  approves 


256        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

the  latter  course,  the  information  given  by  such  con- 
fession being  the  most  inviolable  secret.^ 

The  distinction  of  matter  and  form  is  not  easily 
adapted  to  this  Sacrament.  In  earlier  days  the  imposi- 
tion of  hands  had  a  place  in  Penance  which  might  seem 
to  point  to  it  as  the  matter;  but  this  ceremony  is  not 
retained,  and  it  was  possibly  connected  only  with  the 
public  reconciliation  of  the  penitent.  It  is  sometimes 
held  that  the  sins  confessed,  or  the  contrition  expressed 
by  the  penitent,  should  be  regarded  as  the  matter;  but 
this  only  serves  to  show  how  slight  is  the  importance  of 
the  scholastic  theory  of  matter  and  form.  The  Sacra- 
ment is  complete  when  the  contrite  confession  of  the 
sinner  is  made,  with  purpose  of  amendment  or  satis- 
faction, and  the  word  of  absolution  is  pronounced. 

The  minister  of  the  Sacrament  is  a  priest,  whether 
bishop  or  presbyter,  who  is  subject  in  ordinary  cases  to 
certain  restrictions  due  to  the  connection  of  this  Sacra- 
ment with  the  social  discipline  of  the  Church.  Under 
certain  conditions  St.  Cyprian  allowed  a  deacon  to  re- 
ceive a  confession  and  to  absolve  a  penitent  in  imminent 
danger  of  death,  but  this  was  by  virtue  of  the  extra- 
ordinary prerogative  allowed  to  the  martyrs  in  that  age. 
St.  Thomas  Aquinas  and  other  mediaeval  authors  held 
that  in  peril  of  death  a  man  ought  to  confess  even  to 
a  layman,  if  a  priest  were  not  procurable,  but  they  did 
not  suppose  the  Sacrament  to  be  complete  in  such  a 
case.^ 

■  Matt.  ix.  6  ;  John  xx.  21-23  !  ^  John  i.  9.  Ambrose,  De  Faeiiit., 
i.8  :  "  In  baptismo  utique  remissio  peccatorum  omnium  est.  Quid 
interest  utrum  per  paenitcntiam  an  per  lavacrum  hoc  ius  sibi  datum 
sacerdotes  vindiccnt?     Unum  in  utroque  mysterium  est." 

^  Cyjir.,  Ep.,  xviii.  :  "  Occurrendum  puto  fratribus  nostris,  ul  qui 
libellos  a  martyribus  acceperunl  et  praerogativa  corum  apud  Deum 


The  Ministry  of  the  Sacraments  257 

In  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  Christ  are  continually  offered  as  the  Sacrifice 
of  the  New  Testament,  and  are  given  to  the  faithful  as 
their  spiritual  food  and  a  means  of  union  with  the  Lord. 
"  He  that  eateth  my  Flesh,"  he  said,  "  and  drinketh  my 
Blood,  abideth  in  me,  and  I  in  him."  The  matter  of  this 
Sacrament  is  bread  and  wine,  as  used  by  the  Lord  in  the 
institution  at  his  last  Passover.  The  form  is  a  prayer  of 
blessing,  including  the  words  of  Christ,  This  is  my  Body, 
This  is  my  Blood.  The  minister  is  a  priest,  whether  bishop 
or  presbyter,  who  repeats  the  action  of  the  Lord,  accord- 
ing to  the  command.  Do  this  in  remembrance  of  me.  The 
Lord  declared  that  what  he  gave  to  his  disciples  was  his 
Body,  his  Blood ;  and  upon  this  simple  statement  of  fact 
depends  the  true  doctrine  of  the  Sacrament.  He  had 
formerly  said,  "  Except  ye  eat  the  Flesh  of  the  Son  of 
Man  and  drink  his  Blood,  ye  have  not  life  in  yourselves," 
Doubters  had  asked,  "  How  can  this  man  give  us  his 
flesh  to  eat  ?  "  There  was  no  answer  until  at  the  Paschal 
supper  the  Lord  said,  "  Take,  eat :  this  is  my  Body."  ^ 
Bread  and  wine  were  thus  appointed  to  be  the  signs  or 
figures  of  the  Body  and  the  Blood.  But  we  must  observe 
that  our  Lord  did  not  call  bread  his  Body  or  wine  his  Blood. 
He  said,  "  This — which  I  give  you  to  eat — is  my  Body." 
"  This  Cup — this  which  I  give  you  to  drink — is  my  Blood. 
The  bread  and  wine  were  by  his  word  of  power  become 
his  Body  and  Blood.  "  The  seeming  bread,"  says  St. 
Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  "  is  not  bread,  though  sensible  to  the 

adiuvari  possunt  ...  si  presbyter  repertus  non  fuerit  et  urgere 
exitus  coeperit,  apud  diaconum  quoque  exomologesin  facere  delicti 
sui  possint,  ut  manu  eis  in  paeniteiitiam  imposita  veniant  ad 
Dominum  cum  pace  quam  dari  martyres  litteris  ad  nos  factis 
desideraverunt."     Suvi.  Theol..  Siippl.  8.  2. 

'  John    vi.    51-56 ;    Matt.    xxvi.    26-28  ;    Mark    xiv.    22-24 : 
Luke  xxii.  19,  20  ;  I  Cor.  xi.  23-25. 

S 


258        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

taste,  but  the  Body  of  Christ;  and  the  seeming  wine  is 
not  wine,  though  the  taste  would  have  it  so,  but  the 
Blood  of  Christ."  The  signs,  indeed,  remain  in  their 
proper  reality ;  the  object  of  sense,  the  species  corporalis, 
as  St.  Augustine  calls  it,  is  unaltered  ;  the  sacramental 
change  concerns  that  which  is  invisible,  the  object  of  the 
understanding  and  of  faith.'  The  Sacrament  may  still  be 
called  improperly  bread,  as  having  all  the  sensible  nature 
of  bread,  and  also  as  being  indeed  the  Bread  of  Life. 
"  It  is  no  longer  ordinary  bread,"  says  St.  Irenaeus, 
implying  that  in  some  sense  it  is  bread.  "  Seeing  there 
is  One  Bread,"  says  St.  Paul,  "  we  who  are  many  are  one 
body,  for  we  all  partake  of  the  One  Bread."  In  a 
mystery  so  great  we  can  but  accept  the  Word  of  Revela- 
tion. Complicated  theological  questions  are  raised  about 
it ;  but  the  truth  is  simple.  We  are  not  to  empty  it  of 
meaning  by  elaborate  refinements,  nor  to  explain  aw^ay 
a  clear  statement  of  fact  as  figurative  and  hyperbolical. 
We  have  but  to  believe,  to  adore,  and  to  receive.^ 

The  Sacrament  of  Ordination  is  the  rite  by  which  men 
are  admitted  to  the  sacred  Ministry  of  the  Church. 
Opinion  varies  about  the  manner  in  which  the  powers 
of  the  Ministry  were  conferred  on  the  Apostles — whether 
they  were  given  directly  by  the  Lord  himself,  or  promised 
by  him  and  definitely  conveyed  by  the  Pentecostal  out- 
pouring of  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  Seven  were  appointed 
by  the  Apostles  with  imposition  of  hands  and  prayer. 
There  is  no  express  mention  in  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament  of  the  mode  in  which  presbyters  were 
ordained  ;  but  St.   Paul  speaks  twice  to  Timothy  of  the 

'  See  Note  O. 

■  Iren.,  iv.  8,  oJ/ceVi  Koivhs  Spros  iariv.  I  Cor.  x.  17.  I  adopt 
the  only  rendering  of  this  difficult  text  which  seems  to  give  an 
intelligible  sense,  that  of  the  Revisers'  Margin. 


The  Ministry  of  tJie  Sacraments  259 

charisma  or  gift  of  Ciod  that  was  in  liim  jjy  imposition 
of  hands,  and  this  gift  is  clearly  connected  with  the 
apostolic  ministry  which  he  exercised.  This  scanty 
evidence  accords  with  the  known  practice  of  the  Jewish 
Church  to  appoint  rulers  and  teachers  by  imposition  of 
hands,  the  origin  of  which  was  referred  to  the  consecra- 
tion of  Joshua  by  Moses.  It  is  confirmed  by  the  con- 
tinuous practice  of  the  Christian  Church.^  Ordination 
is  therefore  a  solemn  rite  with  an  appropriate  ceremony. 
It  is  not  on  that  account  alone  a  Sacrament  in  the 
narrower  sense.  The  charis/iia  so  bestowed  is,  indeed, 
a  spiritual  endowment.  The  Ephesine  presbyters  were 
created,  as  St.  Paul  told  them,  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 
But  this  charisma  can  be  distinguished  from  sanctifying 
grace.  True,  but  in  the  Christian  Church  there  is  no 
room  for  a  merely  external  or  ritual  consecration  of  men 
for  a  sacred  office.  Ordination,  says  Jeremy  Taylor,  is 
the  sanctification  of  the  person  in  the  two  senses,  that 
he  is  separated  for  certain  mysterious  actions  of  religion, 
and  also  endowed  with  gifts  that  make  for  holiness. 
"  They  who  are  honoured  with  so  great  a  grace  as  to  be 
called  to  officiate  in  holy  and  useful  ministries,  have  need 
also  of  other  graces  to  make  them  persons  holy  in  habit 
and  disposition  as  well  as  holy  in  calling.  .  .  .  And 
therefore  Ordination  is  a  collation  of  holy  graces  of 
sanctification."  It  thus  comes  under  the  narrower  de- 
finition of  a  Sacrament.  The  ordinary  matter  of  this 
Sacrament  is  imposition  of  hands,  but  there  are  some 
grounds  for  supposing  that  any  other  fitting  ceremony 

'  Acts  vi.  6  ;  i  Tim.  iv.  14 ;  2  Tim.  i.  6  ;  Numb,  xxvii.  18,  23  ; 
Deut.  xxxiv.  9.  It  is  not  dear  that  in  i  Tim.  v.  22  there  is  a 
reference  to  ordination  ;  the  words  would  seem  more  applicable 
to  imposition  of  hands  in  penance.  In  Acts  xiv.  23  the  word 
XetpoTovqffavTfs  does  not  necessarily  imply  imposition  of  hands. 


26o        TJtc  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

might  be  substituted  by  the  authority  of  the  Church. 
The  form  is  the  prayer  of  blessing  by  which  the  grace  of 
the  Ministry  is  called  down  upon  the  subject.  The 
Minister  is  a  Bishop,  as  shown  above  in  the  section  on 
the  Organization  of  the  Church,^ 

Marriage  is  the  only  one  of  the  seven  which  is  ex- 
pressly called  a  Sacrament  in  Holy  Scripture,  and  that 
in  a  sense  which  is  far  from  clear.  It  is  the  rite  by 
which  a  Christian  man  and  woman  are  made  one  flesh. 
Here,  as  in  the  case  of  Penance,  the  distinction  of 
matter  and  form  applies  very  imperfectly  if  at  all. 
It  is  universally  agreed  that  the  Sacrament  is  complete 
when  the  man  and  the  woman  have  openly  before 
witnesses  by  word  of  mouth  taken  each  other  for 
husband  and  wife.  They  are  themselves,  therefore,  the 
Ministers  of  the  Sacrament.  The  priest  intervenes  only 
to  witness  the  agreement  and  to  bless  the  union.  The 
contract  may  in  one  sense  be  fairly  regarded  as  the 
matter  of  the  Sacrament,  for  this  contract  belongs  to  the 
natural  state  of  man.  It  is  therefore  subject  to  natural 
and  to  positive  human  law,  and  cannot  be  validly  made 
except  as  allowed  by  such  law.  Not  all  parties  can 
marry ;  but  when  a  Christian  man  and  a  Christian 
woman  lawfully  enter  into  this  contract,  it  is  at  once 
raised  from  its  natural  origin  to  a  supernatural  power. 
The  grace  conveyed  by  marriage,  if  used  aright,  is  the 
abatement  of  concupiscence,  indicated  by  St.  Paul  wlien 
he  says,  "  It  is  better  to  marry  than  to  burn."  - 

'  Acts  XX.  28.  For  Taylor,  see  Note  P.  In  the  Klvuc 
Anglo-romaine,  vol.  i.  p.  193,  I  have  given  reasons  for  thinking 
that  the  Bishops  of  Rome  and  Alexandria  were  at  one  time 
consecrated  by  imposition  not  of  hands  hut  of  Ihe  Gospels.  Cp. 
Moberly,  Ministerial  Priesthood,  p.  306.  Nor  is  the  opinion  of 
mcliaeval  theologians  about  ordination  per  traditioneni  instru- 
mcntoruDi  to  be  lightly  disregarded. 

-  Eph.  V.  32  ;  I  Cor.  vii.  9. 


The  Ministry  of  the  Sacraments  261 

The  Sacrament  of  Unction  is  the  rite  enjoined  by  St. 
James  :  "  Is  any  among  you  sick  ?  Let  him  call  for  the 
presbyters  of  the  Church ;  and  let  them  pray  over  him, 
anointing  him  with  oil  in  the  name  of  the  Lord ;  and  the 
prayer  of  faith  shall  save  him  that  is  sick,  and  the  Lord 
shall  raise  him  up  )  and  if  he  have  committed  sins,  it 
shall  be  forgiven  him."  This  direction  is  too  clear  to 
leave  any  room  for  controversy,  except  in  regard  to  the 
saving  and  raising  up  which  is  promised.  It  would  be 
natural  to  refer  this  to  bodily  healing,  especially  in  view 
of  the  statement  of  St.  Mark  that  the  Apostles,  on  their 
first  mission,  anointed  with  oil  many  that  were  sick  and 
healed  them.  But  against  this  we  have  to  set  the  fact 
that  such  powers  of  miraculous  healing  were  not  given 
generally  to  the  Church  or  its  ministers.  St.  Paul  says 
expressly  that  all  had  not  the  gifts  of  healing.  But  St. 
James  directs  this  anointing  to  be  done  ordinarily  by 
the  ministers  of  the  Church  in  their  ministerial  capacity. 
The  promise,  therefore,  concerns  ordinary  and  universal 
gifts,  and  such  are  only  the  gifts  of  supernatural  grace. 
A  prayer  for  bodily  healing  would  doubtless  be  conjoined 
with  the  unction,  as  the  practice  of  the  Church  has  always 
required ;  but  the  sacramental  effect,  which  is  promised, 
is  the  spiritual  strengthening  of  the  sufferer  against  the 
perils  which  accompany  the  approach  of  death,  and  that 
putting  away  of  sin  which  is  inseparable  from  the  work 
of  sanctifying  grace.  The  Minister  of  the  Sacrament  is 
a  priest,  whether  bishop  or  presbyter.  The  liturgical 
blessing  of  the  oil  by  the  Bishop,  required  by  the  Latin 
Church,  is  a  very  ancient  ecclesiastical  custom,  but  is 
not  essential,  and  is  unknown  in  the  Eastern  Church.^ 

There  remain  two  points  to  consider  in  the  doctrine  of 
the  Sacraments. 

'  Jas.  V.  14,  15  ;   Mark  vi.  13  ;   i  Cor.  xii.  9,  30.      See  Note  Q. 


262        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Four  out  of  the  seven  serve  to  bring  the  recipient  into 
a  certain  state  of  life.  Baptism  and  Confirmation  initiate 
him  into  the  Christian  covenant ;  Ordination  advances 
him  to  a  grade  of  the  sacred  ministry ;  Marriage  is 
entrance  upon  a  joint  life  and  conversation.  Their  effect 
is  therefore  abiding.  Baptism,  Confirmation,  and  Or- 
dination are  said  by  theologians  to  impress  a  character 
or  mark,  which  is  indelible.  ^Vhat  is  done  in  Baptism 
and  Confirmation  cannot  be  undone,  and  therefore  the 
act  cannot  be  repeated.  The  baptized  is  irrevocably 
joined  to  the  Church,  from  which  he  can  never  be 
wholly  separated.  He  may  be  deprived  of  certain 
privileges  attaching  to  membership  in  the  Church,  but 
lie  may  recover  these  by  })enance.  If  at  the  time  of 
reception  his  disposition  is  such  as  to  frustrate  the 
sanctifying  effect  of  the  grace  given,  the  effect  is  never- 
theless not  dispersed,  but  stored  up  for  future  working. 
The  same  is  true  of  Ordination.  A  bishop,  a  presbyter, 
or  a  deacon  may  by  the  discipline  of  the  Church  be 
denied  the  exercise  of  his  office,  but  his  ordination 
cannot  be  annulled.  The  most  solemn  deposition  or 
degradation  takes  away  only  his  lawful  right  of  minister- 
ing. In  a  less  degree  Marriage  has  a  like  effect,  dis- 
solved only  by  death.  The  operation  of  the  contract 
may  be  suspended,  either  by  the  fault  of  one  party,  or  by 
mutual  consent,  according  to  St.  Paul's  ruling,  for  reasons 
of  devotion ;  but  while  both  live,  neither  can  marry 
afresh.^     No    marriage   can   be    annulled,   unless    there 

'  I  Cor.  vii.  5,  II,  39.  The  exceptional  case  treated  in  ver.  15 
is  that  of  a  marriage  contracted  by  unbelievers,  one  of  whom 
is  afterwards  converted.  St.  Paul's  rule  is  that  if  the  parly  who 
remains  unbaptized  then  dissolves  the  marriage  the  dissolution 
is  effective,  but  he  will  not  allow  the  baptized  party  so  to  act 
(vers.  12-14).      His  ruling  shows  that  Christian  marriage  acijuircs 


The  Ministry  of  the  Sacraments  263 

appear  some  flaw  in  the  original  contract,  which  shows 
that  no  vaUd  union  has  existed. 

Our  last  point  for  consideration  is  the  necessity  of  the 
Sacraments.  Of  Baptism  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  has 
said  unmistakably,  "  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and 
the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 
Baptism  is  therefore  generally  necessary  to  salvation. 
Of  the  gift  bestowed  in  the  Lord's  Supper  he  said  with 
the  same  clearness,  "  Except  ye  eat  the  Flesh  of  the 
Son  of  Man  and  drink  his  Blood,  ye  have  not  life  in 
yourselves."  Here  the  same  necessity  is  indicated  ;  but 
the  sacramental  mode  of  eating  is  not  expressly  men- 
tioned, and  the  words  may  have  a  wider  significance. 
A  necessity  less  absolute  than  in  the  case  of  Baptism  is 
acknowledged  by  the  practice  of  the  Church ;  otherwise 
the  ancient  custom  of  giving  the  Holy  Communion  to 
infants,  still  retained  in  the  East,  would  not  have 
been  abandoned  by  the  greater  part  of  Christendom. 
A  still  lower  degree  of  necessity  attaches  to  the  other 
Sacraments.  Marriage  is  necessary,  as  St.  Paul  inti- 
mates, for  some  persons.  Ordination  is  necessary  for 
the  well-being  and  the  due  administration  of  the  Church. 
Penance  is  necessary  for  the  restoration  of  the  lapsed,  at 
least  in  extreme  cases.  Confirmation  is  required  by  the 
discipline  of  the  Church  for  the  ordinary  approach  to 
the  higher  mysteries.  To  Unction  there  attaches  no 
necessity  at  all ;  but  the  neglect  of  this  Sacrament  in  the 
English  Church  is  unaccountable.^ 

In  all  cases  alike  the  necessity  is  relative.  The  two 
great  Sacraments  are  generally  necessary  to  salvation,  it 
has  been  said,  "  when  they  may  be  had."      The  Church 

its    indissoluble  character    from  the   baptism  of  the    two  parties. 
So  Innocent  III.  in  Deer.  iv.  tit.  19,  c.  7. 
'  John  iii.  5  ;  vi.  53  ;   i  Cor.  vii.  37. 


264        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

has  always  recognized  what  is  called  the  baptism  of  desire, 
where  a  believer  by  no  fault  of  his  own  has  been  denied 
access  to  the  font.  When  Innocent  III.  was  consulted 
about  a  priest  who  after  his  death  was  discovered  to  have 
passed  his  whole  life  unwittingly  without  Baptism,  he 
replied  unhesitatingly  that  such  a  man  had  the  grace 
and  fruit  of  the  Sacrament.  The  answer  applies  to  all 
cases  where  a  man  is  in  good  faith  persuaded  that  he 
has  received  a  valid  Sacrament.  The  Sacraments  arc 
necessary  only  in  relation  to  the  voluntary  action  of  man  ; 
he  may  not  hope  for  the  effect  if  he  wilfully  or  carelessly 
remove  the  cause.  Desiring  the  grace  of  God,  he  is 
bound  to  use  the  means  appointed.  God  is  not  bound. 
As  the  wind  bloweth  where  it  listeth,  so  is  the  operation 
of  the  Spirit  free  in  the  bestowal  of  grace.' 

'  Nicholson,  Exposition  of  the  Catechisi/i,  p.  151,  ed.  1842. 
Innoc.  III.,  in  Deer,  iii,  tit.  43,  c.  2  :  "  Presbyterum,  quem  sine 
unda  baptismatis  extremum  diem  clausisse  litoiis  tuis  significasti, 
quia  in  sanctae  matris  Ecclesiae  fide  et  Christi  nominis  confessione 
perseveravit,  ab  originali  peccato  solutum,  et  caelestis  patriae 
gaudium  esse  adeptum,  ex  aucloritate  sanctorum  Patruni  Augustini 
atqui  Ambrosii  asserimus  incunctanter." 


CHAPTER  V 

CONCERNING    PRACTICAL    RELIGION 

Sect.  I . — Conscience 

Religion  is  the  voluntary  submission  of  human  actions 
to  the  control  of  a  higher  Power.  In  the  language  of 
the  New  Testament  the  Christian  Religion  is  usually 
described  as  the  service  of  God.  The  strongest  possible 
word  is  used.  Christians  are  bond-servants,  slaves  ;  that 
is  to  say,  their  wills,  their  souls  and  bodies,  are  not  their 
own  ;  they  are  bought  with  a  price.  But  they  enter  into 
this  servitude  and  continue  in  it  by  an  act  of  their  own 
will.  The  Christian  ideal  is  to  be  free,  not  using 
freedom  for  a  cloak  of  wickedness,  but  as  a  bond-servant 
of  God.i 

The  first  thing  needed  for  service  of  this  kind  is  to 
know  the  will  of  the  Master,  The  knowledge  of  God, 
whether  attained  by  nature  or  by  revelation,  is  the 
groundwork  of  religion.  But  for  this  purpose  a  purely 
objective  knowledge  is  not  sufficient.     To  be  religious 

'  I  Cor.  vi.  20  ;  i  Pet.  ii.  i6.  The  word  religion  is  badly  used 
in  the  English  Bible,  In  Acts  xxvi,  5,  it  stands  for  QpT]<rKiia.,  the 
formal  observance  of  rule  ;  in  Gal.  i.  13,  14,  'lovSaiVr^ds  is  merely 
the  Jewish  polity  (of,  2  Mace.  ii.  21)  ;  in  Jas.  i.  26,  dpTJa-Ko? 
probably  means  an  observer  of  ceremonies,  and  such  is  his  Qpr]<TKiia, 
while  in  the  next  verse  6pr)<TKiia  seems  to  be  used  with  a  touch  of 
irony.     The  word  religion  occurs  nowhere  else. 

265 


266        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

a  man  must  have  this  knowledge  subjectively  in  relation 
to  himself.  He  must  begin  with  the  question  that  rose 
to  the  lips  of  St.  Paul  at  the  moment  of  his  conversion  : 
"  What  shall  I  do,  Lord  ?  "  Knowledge  of  this  kind  is 
called  by  a  special  name,  Conscience,  The  idea  was 
common  to  Greek  and  Latin  thought,  and  found 
similar  expression  in  both  languages.  The  Greek  word 
barely  made  its  way  into  the  Septuagint  rendering  of 
the  Old  Testament;  it  does  not  occur  in  the  Gospels, 
but  is  frequent  in  the  Epistles  of  the  New  Testament.^ 

The  Apostles  build  then  upon  a  current  idea,  the  exact 
nature  of  which  we  must  ascertain.  It  starts  from  the 
notion  of  acc[uaintance  with  the  actions  of  another.  To 
be  conscious  of  him  is  to  share  his  knowledge  of  what 
he  is  doing,  to  be  privy  to  his  designs,  the  word  being 
used  more  especially  of  a  guilty  knowledge  which  makes 
a  man  accessory  to  crime.  From  this  we  pass  to  a  like 
knowledge  of  one's  own  guilt ;  and  here  the  specific 
sense  of  the  word  begins.  To  be  conscious,  in  this 
sense,  is  to  know  oneself  to  be  guilty,  or  inversely  to 
know  oneself  to  be  innocent.  Mens  sibi  conscia  recti  is 
so  written  by  Vergil,  while  the  Horatian  phrase  Jiil  conscire 
sibi  shows  how  the  word,  used  absolutely,  points  rather 
to  consciousness  of  wrong.  So  St.  Paul  writes,  "  I  am 
conscious  of  nothing."  He  speaks  of  men  who  are 
"branded  in  their  own  conscience  as  with  a  hot  iron," 
the  knowledge  of  their  guilt  being  ineffaceably  impressed 
on  them.  He  speaks  of  the  testimony  of  his  conscience 
to  his  own  purity  of  motive.     There  is  a  "  conscience 

'  The  verb  avviitiva.i,  Lat.  conscire,  or  more  commonly  conscius 
esse,  gives  the  substantive  tb  (rvvtiZhs  or  o-frei'STjo-is,  Lat.  conscicntia, 
common  from  the  time  of  Cicero.  The  LXX.  has  the  word  only  in 
Eccles.  X.  20,  KOI  76  fV  (n;vei5'i7<r6i  aov  Paffi\(a  nrj  Kurapatrri. 
The  reading  in  John  viii.  9  i-^  apparently  not  genuine. 


Conscience  267 

of  sins,"  which  is  destroyed  by  the  grace  of  pardon.  The 
Blood  of  Christ  cleanses  the  conscience  from  dead 
works.  There  is  thus  an  evil  conscience  which  needs 
cleansing,  and  a  good  or  pure  conscience,  which  is  the 
knowledge  that  sin  either  has  not  been  done,  or  has 
been  altogether  put  away  by  the  sanctifying  grace  of 
God.' 

Passing  from  this  use,  the  word  comes  to  mean  the 
faculty  of  the  mind  by  which  a  man  reviews  his  own 
actions,  adjudging  them  right  or  wrong.  There  is  a 
curious  tendency  to  separate  this  faculty  from  the  other 
reasoning  powers,  and  to  personify  it  as  a  being  apart 
from  the  man  himself,  praising  him  or  condemning  him 
for  what  he  has  done,  and  consequently  controlling  liim 
by  the  anticipation  of  judgment.  This  would  seem  to 
be  what  Socrates  meant  by  his  familiar  demon.  The 
real  fact  is  shrewdly  expressed  in  the  well-known  line  of 
Menander,  which  declares  that  to  every  man  his  own 
conscience  stands  for  God.^  The  only  approach  to  this 
in  the  New  Testament  in  found  in  St.  Paul's  words,  "  my 
conscience  bearing  witness  with  me  ; "  but  in  the  strictly 
accurate  sense  of  a  reasoning  faculty  the  word  frequently 
occurs.  Mind  and  conscience  are  coupled  by  St.  Paul, 
as  defiled  by  sin  ;  that  is  to  say,  the  reasoning  faculty 
which  seizes  the  distinction  of  right  and  wrong  as  objective 
fact,  and  the  faculty  which  views  the  distinction  sub- 
jectively in  relation  to  self,  are  alike  injured.     I'he  pure 

1  I  Cor.  iv.  4 ;  i  Tim.  iv.  2  ;  2  Cor.  i.  12  ;  Heb.  i.\.  9,  14; 
X.  2,  22;  xiii.  18;  Acts  xxiii.  i;  xxiv.  16;  i  Tim.  i.  5,  19; 
2  Tim.  i.  3. 

"  BpoTOis  d-rraatv  •^  (TvvciSTjcns  &e6s.  The  more  natural  word  in 
this  sense  is  to  crvueiSos,  which  is  not  used  in  the  New  Testament. 
It  may  be  doubted  whether  conscientia  is  used  in  this  sense  by 
classical  writers,'  but  the  phrase  salva  conscictitia  approximates 
to  it. 


268        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

conscience  in  which  we  are  to  hold  the  mystery  of  the 
faith  is  a  faculty  clarified  hy  grace.  The  meaning  of  the 
word  is  made  especially  clear  in  St.  Paul's  instruction  to 
the  Corinthians  about  the  idol-ofiferings.  ^^'e  have  an 
objective  knowledge,  he  says,  that  an  idol  is  a  mere 
nothing,  the  sacrifices  before  the  idol  have  no  significance, 
the  flesh  of  the  victim  has  no  sacramental  effect  and  is 
merely  so  much  good  food.  There  can  therefore  be  no 
l^arm  in  eating  it.  "  Howbeit  in  all  men  there  is  not 
that  knowledge  :  but  some,  being  used  until  now  to  the 
idol,  eat  as  of  a  thing  sacrificed  to  an  idol ;  and  their  con- 
science, being  weak,  is  defiled."  This  weak  conscience  is 
a  faculty  incapable  of  distinguishing  between  what  is  right 
and  what  is  wrong  in  the  action  ;  unable  to  dissociate  the 
act  of  eating  from  an  act  of  communion  with  the  idol.  For 
this  reason  Christians  were  bound  to  be  careful.  '"  For  if 
a  man  see  thee  which  hast  knowledge  sitting  at  meat  in 
an  idol's  temple,  will  not  his  conscience,  if  he  is  weak, 
be  emboldened  to  eat  things  sacrificed  to  idols  ?  "  That 
is  to  say,  he  will  be  led  to  do  that  which  he  considers  in 
some  measure  an  act  of  idolatrous  worship.  Returning 
to  the  subject,  and  giving  the  Corinthian  Christians 
practical  advice,  St.  Paul  says,  "  Whatsoever  is  sold  in  the 
shambles,  eat,  asking  no  question  for  conscience  sake." 
It  may  or  may  not  be  the  flesh  of  a  sacrifice  ;  they  are 
not  to  trouble  themselves  about  it,  or  make  it  a  matter 
of  conscience.  "  If  one  of  them  that  believe  not  biddeth 
you  to  a  feast,  and  ye  are  disposed  to  go ;  whatsoever  is 
set  before  you,  eat,  asking  no  question  for  conscience 
sake."  It  is  the  same  advice  again.  "  But  if  any  man 
say  unto  you,  This  hath  been  offered  in  sacrifice,  eat  not, 
for  his  sake  that  showed  it,  and  for  conscience  sake  : 
conscience,  I  say,  not  thine  own,  but  tlie  other's."  Now 
tlic   direction    is   <hanL!cd.      To  the  man  wlio  savs   this — 


Conscience  269 

probably  a  Christian  of  confused  mind — it  is  matter  of 
conscience  ;  he  regards  the  flesh  subjectively  as  a  means 
of  idolatrous  communion;  and  the  man  who  knows  better 
is  required  by  the  law  of  charity  not  to  cause  him  scandal. 
*'  But  why,"  St.  Paul  conceives  an  objector  asking,  "  is 
my  liberty  judged  by  another  conscience  ?  "  He  replies 
curtly,  "  Whether  ye  eat  or  drink,  or  whatsoever  ye  do, 
do  all  to  the  glory  of  God.  Give  no  occasion  of 
stumbling."  ^ 

To  the  respect  which  is  due  to  the  weak  conscience 
we  shall  presently  return.  Here  we  must  notice  that, 
without  passing  altogether  away  from  subjectivity,  the 
conscience  adjudges  a  thing  right  or  wrong  in  the 
abstract ;  right  or  wrong  for  another  as  well  as  for  self. 
This  implies  a  reference  to  an  external  standard.  The 
judgment  is  not,  "  This  is  wrong  because  I  think  it 
wrong ; "  otherwise  I  should  not  be  able  in  my  con- 
science to  judge  another.  The  conscience,  that  is  to 
say,  is  not  a  criterion  to  itself;  it  refers  to  a  standard. 
What  is  this  ?  The  natural  conscience  will  refer  to  many 
standards — public  opinion,  general  utility,  or  others. 
Common  morality  becomes  possible  only  when  a  com- 
mon   standard    is   recognized.     The    Stoic  notion  of  a 

'  Rom.  ix.  I  ;  Tit.  i.  15  ;  i  Tim.  iii.  9 ;  I  Cor.  viii.  i-io  ; 
X.  25-32.  The  last  passage  admits  two  varied  interpret.ations. 
"For  conscience  sake"  in  vers.  25  and  27  may  possibly  mean, 
"  Lest  your  own  conscience  be  defiled  by  the  knowledge  of  the  fact," 
in  which  case  it  is  advice  to  those  of  weak  conscience  ;  but  this  is 
improbable  in  view  of  what  follows.  In  ver.  29  the  question  has 
been  taken  to  mean,  "  Why  should  I  use  my  liberty  so  as  to 
scandalize  another,  doing  that  for  which  his  conscience  will 
condemn  me  ? "  But  this  is  harsh  and  obscure,  and  leaves  the 
further  question  unexplained,  "  Why  am  I  evil  spoken  of  for  that 
for  which  I  give  thanks?"  The  interruption  of  a  supposed  objector 
is  characteristic  of  St.  Paul's  style. 


2/0        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

moral  impulse  in  man,  to  obey  which  is  virtue,  strikes  at 
the  root  of  social  existence  ;  for  it  makes  every  man  a  law 
to  himself.  This  would  be  an  insufficient  foundation  for 
morality  even  if  man  were  unfallen,  abiding  still  in  the 
excellence  of  his  created  nature.  That  God  the  Creator 
made  man  with  an  inclination  to  good  is  as  certain  as  that 
he  gave  him  also  the  power  of  choosing  evil ;  and  this 
inclination  is  not  wholly  destroyed  in  fallen  man.  But 
the  fact  that  choice  is  possible  and  necessary  shows  that 
a  man  is  not  merely  to  follow  inclination  even  when  it  is 
good.  He  is  to  judge.  There  is  no  moral  sense  directly 
perceiving  right  as  right  and  wrong  as  wrong.  There  is 
an  active  faculty  of  reasoning  which  discerns  between 
right  and  wrong,  measuring  every  act  by  reference  to  a 
standard.  When  this  standard  is  the  will  of  a  higher 
being,  the  conscience  becomes  religious.  The  higher 
being,  real  or  imaginary,  may  still  be  far  from  supreme  ; 
may  be  whimsical,  arbitrary,  fantastic.  We  then  have 
a  degraded  form  of  religion.  But  if  it  be  to  the  one 
supreme  God  that  reference  is  made,  to  the  Creator 
by  whom  all  things  consist,  whose  Will  is  indistinguish- 
able from  the  perfect  good,  we  then  have  the  one  tine 
religion. 

A  conscience  rightly  informed  is  called  by  St.  Peter 
a  conscience  of  God.^  It  is  the  conscience  of  a  man 
who  not  only  acknowledges  God  objectively  as  Creator 
and  Judge,  but  also  accepts  the  Will  of  God  subjectively 
as  the  standard  by  which  he  discerns  good  and  evil. 
This,  when  duly  instructed  in  the  doctrine  of  Jesus 
Christ,  is  the  Christian  conscience.  Instructed  only  by 
the  law  of  Nature,  it  is  still  a  conscience  of  God.     The 

'  I  Pet.  ii.  19 ;  cp.  I  Cor.  viii.  7,  tj;  (rweiSi^o-ei  toD  eiSc^Aou, 
which  means,  if  that  be  the  right  reading,  a  conscience  governed 
by  the  idolatrous  idea. 


Conscience  271 

Gentiles,  says  St.  Paul,  without  any  revealed  law, 
"  show  the  work  of  the  Law  written  in  their  hearts, 
their  conscience  bearing  witness  therewith,  and  their 
reasonings  one  with  another  accusing  or  else  excusing 
them."  By  this  standard  of  God's  Law  a  man's  con- 
science judges  not  only  his  own  actions,  but  those  of 
others  ;  marks  them  as  right  or  wrong  either  absolutely 
or  in  relation  to  circumstances.  Such  judgment  is  not 
to  be  despised,  as  if  each  man  had  nothing  to  regard 
but  the  conclusions  of  his  own  conscience.  To  the 
conscience  of  Christians  in  general  St.  Paul,  though 
holding  it  a  very  small  thing  to  be  judged  of  men, 
desired  to  commend  himself.'  There  is  indeed  no 
such  thing,  strictly  speaking,  as  a  common  conscience, 
a  conscience  of  the  community.  The  objective  standard 
of  right  is  proposed  to  the  Church,  received  by  the 
Church,  guarded  by  the  public  teaching  and  judgment 
of  the  Church :  but  the  subjective  judgment  is  indi- 
vidual ;  each  man  for  himself  measures  every  action 
by  the  standard  proposed.  To  leave  this  undone,  or 
to  accept  a  judgment  ready-made,  is  to  abdicate  the 
function  of  conscience  altogether.  At  the  same  time 
the  judgment  of  many  is  founded  on  a  broader  experience 
than  the  judgment  of  one.  We  speak  of  common  sense, 
meaning  by  this  not  a  corporate  judgment  of  humanity, 
but  the  general  consent  of  experienced  men.  A  common 
conscience  of  this  kind  there  is ;  and  the  Christian  who 
dissents  from  the  common  Christian  conscience  needs 
justification  no  less  than  a  man  who  runs  counter  to  the 
common  sense  of  mankind. 

The  weak  conscience,  we  have  seen,  is  a  conscience 
imperfectly  informed,  and  therefore  unable  to   come  to 
a  decision.     The  weakness  may  be  due  either  to  lack  of 
'  Rom.  ii.  15  ;  i  Cor.  iv.  3  ;  2  Cor.  iv.  2. 


2/2        TJie  Eleine/its  of  Christian  Doctrine 

knowledge  or  to  lack  of  judgment.  The  latter  weak- 
ness can  be  remedied  by  saving  grace  with  diligent 
exercise  of  the  undeveloped  faculty ;  the  lack  of  know- 
ledge can  be  supplied  only  by  instruction.  But  while 
the  conscience  remains  weak,  how  does  the  man  stand  ? 
They  that  are  strong  are  forbidden  to  encourage  him  by 
their  example  to  do  a  thing  about  which  he  is  doubtful. 
For  him  it  is  wrong.  St.  Paul  has  a  hard  saying  here. 
Dealing  with  a  question  near  akin  to  that  of  the  idol- 
offerings,  he  says,  "  He  that  doubteth  is  condemned  if 
he  eat,  because  he  eateth  not  of  faith ;  and  whatsoever 
is  not  of  faith  is  sin."  We  must  not  take  these  last 
words  out  of  their  context,  as  if  they  were  a  proposition 
universally  applicable  ;  but  St.  Paul  does  lay  down,  as  a 
rule  of  conduct  applying  to  the  case  before  him,  the 
general  principle  that  a  man  who  does  a  thing  about  which 
he  doubts  whether  it  be  not  wrong  is  acting  sinfully.^ 

The  case,  however,  must  be  looked  at  narrowly.  It 
is  a  case  of  a  single  alternative,  to  eat  or  to  abstain. 
The  one  alternative,  to  abstain,  is  certainly  not  wrong  ; 
the  other,  to  eat,  is  doubtful.  A  man  compelled  to 
choose  between  the  two  is  bound  to  take  the  course 
which  is  certainly  not  wrong.  To  act  without  faith, 
that  is  to  say,  without  the  certitude  of  being  right  in  the 
sight  of  God,  when  he  has  the  option  of  doing  so,  is 
sin.  But  this  ruling  does  not  directly  cover  the  case  of 
a  man  who  has  before  him  two  or  more  courses,  about 
every  one  of  which  he  is  doubtful  whether  it  be  not 
wrong.  How  shall  he  act  ?  If  he  be  shut  up  to  an 
absolute  alternative,  as  to  speak  or  not  to  speak,  and 
either  course  may  with  equal  possibility  be  wrong,  it  is 
clear  that  in  doing  what  is  doubtful  he  acts  under  com- 
pulsion ;  and  an  act  done  truly  under  compulsion  has  no 
'   Rom.  xiv.  23. 


I 


Conscience  273 

moral  quality  at  all,  good  or  bad  \  the  doer  can  be 
neither  condemned  nor  praised.  But  such  a  case  must 
be  of  the  rarest.  As  a  rule  one  course  will  be  less 
l)robably  wrong  than  the  other,  and  probability,  as 
Butler  has  said,  is  the  guide  of  life.  The  man  is  bound 
to  avoid  the  course  which  is  more  probably  wrong. 

What  is  this  probability  ?  It  is  a  judgment  of  tlie 
man's  conscience,  not  final  and  conclusive,  but  tentative, 
either  because  made  distrustfully  or  because  based  on 
imperfect  evidence.  But  why  is  a  man  bound  to  act  on 
a  judgment  so  imperfect  ?  The  answer  is  found  in  the 
subjectivity  of  the  service  which  God  requires,  and  of 
sin  which  is  the  denial  of  that  service.  "  To  him,"  says 
St.  James,  "  that  knoweth  to  do  good,  and  doeth  it  not, 
to  him  it  is  sin."  He  has  nothing  to  go  by  except  his 
own  conscience  of  God,  whether  weak  or  strong,  ill 
informed  or  well  instructed.  Even  if  his  judgment  be 
altogether  wrong,  he  is  bound  to  act  upon  it.  "  I  know  " 
says  St.  Paul,  "  and  am  persuaded  in  the  Lord  Jesus, 
that  nothing  is  unclean  of  itself."  There  is  the  objective 
truth.  "  But  to  him  who  accounteth  anything  to  be 
unclean,  to  him  it  is  unclean."  There  is  the  subjective 
judgment,  contrary  to  the  objective  truth,  but  neverthe- 
less a  judgment  on  which  the  man  must  act.^ 

This  truth,  simple  in  itself,  is  confused  by  the  common 
mistake  of  personifying  the  conscience,  or  treating  it  as 
an  objective  something  external  to  the  man,  a  guide  and 
mentor.  If  it  were  such,  it  were  no  more  excusable  to 
act  on  a  weak  conscience  than  to  obey  any  other  faulty 
adviser.  A  man  beguiled  by  his  conscience  would  have 
no  more  to  say  than  Eve  when  beguiled  by  the  serpent. 
On  the  other  hand,  if  a  man  were  bound  to  follow  a  guide 
external  to  himself,  there  would  be  an  end  of  personal 
'  Jas.  iv.  17  ;  Rom.  xiv.  14. 

T 


274        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

responsibility.  And  worse  ;  this  guide  would  be  set  up  in 
a  sort  of  rivalry  with  the  Law  of  God.  ^^'arned  by  the 
Law,  warned  also  in  a  different  sense  by  his  conscience,  a 
man  would  be  called  upon  to  obey  the  latter.  Such  intoler- 
able consequences  follow  from  St.  Paul's  teaching  if  the 
conscience  be  personified.  But  the  conscience  does  not 
give  commands ;  it  receives  them.  It  is  not  my  con- 
science that  bids  me  do  this  or  that.  God  bids  me  by 
nature  or  by  revelation ;  my  conscience  accepts  the 
bidding,  as  my  faith  or  understanding  reads  it.  As  I 
read,  so  I  am  bound  to  act. 

A  man  is  not  thereupon  discharged  from  all  responsi- 
bility. He  is  responsible  for  the  exercise  of  every  faculty 
that  he  has,  whether  faith  or  understanding  or  conscience. 
If  he  misread  the  standard,  or  if  he  falter  in  applying  it 
to  his  own  actions,  he  must  answer  for  this.  But  there 
is  a  difference  in  the  degree  of  responsibility.  If  a  man 
run  counter  to  the  objective  rule  of  right,  he  will  suffer. 
If  he  run  counter  to  his  own  subjective  knowledge  of 
it,  however  imperfect,  he  is  a  worse  offender.  The 
distinction  is  drawn  by  the  Lord  himself:  "That  servant 
which  knew  his  lord's  will,  and  made  not  ready,  nor  did 
according  to  his  will,  shall  be  beaten  with  many  stripes  ; 
but  he  that  knew  not,  and  did  things  worthy  of  stripes, 
shall  be  beaten  with  few  stripes."  ^ 

The  Conscience,  then,  is  the  faculty  by  which  a  man 
applies  the  A\'ill  of  God,  so  far  as  he  knows  it,  to  the 
control  of  his  own  actions.  He  is  bound  to  use  this 
faculty  as  he  best  can.  This  done,  he  is  bound  to  act  on 
the  result.  Religion  is  that  subjective  obedience,  the 
joyful  recognition  of  oneself  as  a  bond-servant  of  God. 

'  Luke  xii.  47,  48. 


Duty  275 

Sect.  II. — Duty 

AVhat  the  conscience  lays  hold  of  is  dut)-.  Duty  is 
first  conceived  as  a  debt  owed  to  another.  A  man  owes 
to  his  parents  some  return  for  the  life  they  have  given, 
and  for  the  care  they  have  bestoAved  upon  him  from 
infancy.  He  owes  to  society  some  return  for  the  pro- 
tection always  extended  to  him,  for  the  bare  possibility 
as  well  as  for  the  attainment  of  true  human  life.  Natural 
and  civic  duties  rest  on  this  foundation.  But  ultimately 
he  owes  life  and  being  to  God  the  Creator;  his  only 
possible  repayment  of  this  debt  is  to  be  what  God  wills 
him  to  be  and  to  do  what  God  wills  him  to  do.  This 
lays  upon  him  an  obligation  which  is  religious  duty. 

Every  such  duty  becomes  imperative  when  it  is 
sufficiently  proposed  to  the  conscience.  The  conscience 
does  not  create  the  obligation ;  the  man  does  not  take 
it  upon  himself;  it  is  laid  upon  him  by  the  facts  of  his 
being,  ^^■hen  the  duty  is  presented  to  the  conscience 
it  becomes  a  moral  law,  obedience  to  which  is  indeed 
voluntary,  in  the  sense  that  disobedience  remains 
possible,  but  is  none  the  less  a  debt.  We  glorify  God 
by  doing  his  will,  because  we  are  thus  fulfilling  his 
creative  work ;  but  we  do  not  add  anything  of  our  own. 
"  When  ye  shall  have  done  all  the  things  that  are  com- 
manded you,"  said  the  Lord,  "  say.  We  are  unprofitable 
servants ;  we  have  done  that  which  it  was  our  duty 
to  do."  1 

Religious  duty  is  the  obligation  laid  upon  man  to  do 
what  God  wills  him  to  do,  to  be  what  God  wills  him  to 
be.  Duty,  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the  word,  is  con- 
cerned with  doing  ;  the  duty  of  being  involves  deeper 
considerations. 

'  Luke  xvii.  10. 


276        The  E/einents  of  Christian  Doctrine 

"  Ye  received  of  us,"  writes  St.  Paul  to  the  Thessa- 
lonians,  "  how  ye  ought  to  walk  and  to  please  God."  He 
had  given  them  a  rule  of  conduct,  and  this  in  the  form  of 
a  charge  laid  upon  them  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus, 
The  specific  charge  was  very  simple  ;  it  was  to  abstain 
from  fornication.  This  was  not  to  be  the  whole  of  their 
morality  ;  it  was  a  formal  addition  to  that  standard  of 
right  which  they  had  already  acknowledged.  They  were 
not  to  give  way  to  the  passion  of  lust  "  as  the  Gentiles 
which  know  not  God."  There  was  in  these  people  a 
solid  foundation  of  morals  ;  there  was  no  need  to  write 
to  them  of  brotherly  love.  Regarding  this  they  were 
themselves  taught  of  God,  by  the  natural  law,  as  St.  Paul 
says  elsewhere,  written  upon  their  hearts.  Christian 
morality  was  to  be  raised  on  this  foundation  by  the 
proposal  to  the  conscience  of  additional  duties,  which 
had  not  hitherto  been  recognized.  For  a  beginning  there 
was  proposed  a  restraint  of  that  indulgence  of  carnal 
desire  in  which  the  general  conscience  of  paganism  saw 
no  harm.i 

The  revelation  of  the  moral  law  proceeded  uniformly 
after  the  manner  thus  indicated  by  St.  Paul.  There  is 
a  traditional  morality,  the  roots  of  which  are  lost  in  the 
past,  which  may  be  derived  from  some  primordial  revela- 
tion, or  may  be  the  result  only  of  human  experience,  the 
transmission  of  accumulated  judgments  upon  the  natural 
indications  of  God's  will.  It  varies  within  wide  limits, 
Ijeing  sometimes  grotesquely  perverted,  sometimes  attain- 
ing to  singular  nobility.  There  is  no  evidence  of  con- 
tinued progress  in  the  way  either  of  improvement  or  of 
degeneration.  The  accepted  standard  fluctuates,  per- 
version in  one  respect  going  hand  in  hand  Avith  improve- 
ment in  other  respects.  But  a  standard  of  some  kind, 
'    I  Thess.  iv.  1-9. 


Duty  '      277 

however  degraded,  every  community  of  men  does  accept. 
There  is  always  something  which  ought  or  ought  not  to 
be  done ;  some  rule  which  is  imposed  not  by  inclination 
or  by  a  calculation  of  advantage,  but  by  a  categorical 
imperative.  It  is  decreed,  without  appeal,  that  such  a 
thing  ought  not  to  be  done.  By  what  authority  it  is  so 
ruled  may  not  be  at  all  clear  ;  fantastic  notions  on  the 
subject  may  prevail ;  but  the  fact  is  incontestable.  Such 
is  natural  morality,  which,  however  degraded,  Christian 
doctrine  refers  ultimately  to  God,  as  the  Author  of  nature. 
Upon  this  natural  morality  supervened  the  revelation 
of  God's  will  given  by  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  It 
was  gradual  and  very  slow.  The  ^^'ord  of  the  Lord  was 
precept  upon  precept,  line  upon  line.  Many  things  were 
permitted,  some  things  were  even  commanded,  because 
of  the  hardness  of  men's  hearts.  But  even  those  rules  of 
the  Mosaic  Law  which  seem  to  us  most  harsh  were  a 
softening  of  the  accepted  standard.  The  law  of  retaliation 
— an  eye  for  an  eye,  a  tooth  for  a  tooth — was  a  mitiga- 
tion of  the  ferocity  of  revenge,  limiting  punishment  by  the 
measure  of  the  wrong  committed.  Acts  again  are  related 
with  complacency  in  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  or 
even  praised  by  the  witness  of  prophecy,  which  accord- 
ing to  our  standard  are  cruel  and  abominable.  They 
are  allowed  because  not  contravening  the  will  of  God 
so  far  as  it  was  then  revealed ;  they  are  praised  because 
done  with  a  single  eye  to  the  service  of  God  as  it  was 
then  conceived.  When  Jehu  treacherously  slays  the  sons 
of  Ahab  and  the  Baal-worshippers  in  Samaria,  his  zeal 
for  the  Lord  is  commended ;  the  act  is  praiseworthy  as 
an  attempt  to  root  out  evil  by  methods  in  which  the 
conscience  of  the  actor  saw  no  wrong.  When  Saul  spares 
Agag  and  the  spoil  of  the  Amalekites,  he  is  condemned, 
not  for  his  clemency,  but  for  indifference  to  the  service 


2/8        Tlie  Elements  of  Christ iati  Doctrine 

of  God  and  to  the  standard  which  in  his  conscience  he 
accepted.  We  shall  be  disappointed  if  we  look  to  the 
pages  of  the  Old  Testament  for  evidence  of  any  great 
advance  upon  traditional  morality.  In  some  respects  we 
shall  find  the  standard  there  set  lower  than  that  which 
contemporary  nations  among  the  Gentiles  approved. 
The  one  great  moral  truth  taught  by  the  Law  and  the 
Prophets  was  the  reference  of  all  actions  to  the  judgment 
of  the  one  supreme  God.  His  will  is  the  only  measure 
of  right ;  all  men  alike  are  bound,  by  virtue  of  their 
creation,  to  submit  themselves  to  his  pleasure,  to  learn 
his  will  so  far  as  it  may  be  ascertained,  and  according  as 
they  know  it  so  to  act. 

This  broad  conception  of  the  service  of  God  was  over- 
laid in  later  Judaism  by  a  minutely  particular  code  of 
duties,  the  work  of  scribes  and  lawyers.  The  careful 
ordering  of  life  by  rules  drawn  inferentially  from  the  Law 
might  seem  to  be  a  safeguard  for  the  idea  of  duty.  In 
effect  there  was  a  very  different  result,  to  which  two 
causes  contributed.  The  minute  and  burdensome  rules 
that  were  laid  on  men  required  a  close  scrutiny  to  secure 
their  oliservance ;  to  obey  them  all  was  the  utmost  that 
a  man  could  do  ;  he  was  compelled  to  interpret  them 
narrowly,  and  the  result  was  the  development  of  that  sort 
of  scru])ulous  conscience  which  finds,  without  intentional 
seeking,  every  possible  evasion  of  a  command.  The 
idea  of  duty  is  ruined  when  it  becomes  a  matter  of  course 
to  shirk.  It  was  ruined  yet  more  in  Judaism  by  the 
conception  of  merit.  As  the  requirements  of  the 
traditional  law  grew  more  complex,  it  became  practically 
impossil)le  for  an  ordinary  man  to  fulfil  them.  A  baking 
performance  was  therefore  regarded  as  sufficient,  no  man 
])eing  bound  to  the  impossible.  There  was  then  brought 
in  the  conception  of  gaining  merit,  which  is  characteristic 


Duty  279 

of  the  ethical  s)stems  of  the  East,  The  performance  of 
a  hard  task  in  the  way  of  rehgious  observance  meant  so 
much  put  down  to  the  credit  of  the  doer,  which  the 
justice  of  God  would  repay  him  at  some  future  settle- 
ment. Religion  is  thus  made  a  matter  not  of  obligation 
but  of  calculation ;  a  man  successful  in  this  traffic,  far 
from  regarding  himself  as  debtor  to  God,  owing  himself 
and  all  that  he  can  do,  is  led  to  consider  God  as 
debtor  to  himself,  owing  him  a  covenanted  recompense 
for  the  service  he  has  done.  Up  to  a  certain  point  he 
owes  God  service ;  beyond  that  point  he  begins  to 
accumulate  a  balance  of  merit  in  his  favour.  The  con- 
ception of  duty  is  gone. 

The  teaching  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  directed 
against  these  perversions  of  the  truth.  He  did  not 
directly  assail  the  accepted  code  of  minute  regulations. 
That  would  have  been  to  destroy  the  foundation  of 
morality.  He  indirectly  assailed  the  spirit  of  it  by  some- 
times disregarding  rules  of  small  importance,  such  as 
those  of  the  prescribed  washings.  Rules  which  violated 
the  real  purpose  of  the  Divine  Law,  like  those  of  sabbath- 
keeping,  he  openly  set  at  naught.  Refinements  of  casuistry 
which  enabled  the  falsely  scrupulous  to  evade  the  plain 
meaning  of  the  Law,  as  in  the  famous  case  of  Corban, 
lie  indignantly  condemned  :  "  Full  well  do  ye  reject  the 
commandment  of  God  that  ye  may  keep  your  tradition." 
The  doctrine  of  merit,  the  doing  of  service  with  an  eye 
to  reward,  the  calculation  of  much  and  little,  he  swept 
away  by  teaching  the  infinity  of  obligation,  ^^^^en  all 
has  been  done  we  are  still  unprofitable  servants  :  we  can 
do  no  more  than  our  bare  duty.  The  servant's  hire  is 
not  indeed  withheld  ;  no  good  work,  however  hidden, 
shall  lose  its  reward  :  "  thy  Father  which  seeth  in  secret 
shall  recompense  thee."     But  this  reward  is  declared  by 


28o        TJie  Elcvieiits  of  CJiristiau  Doctrine 

the  parable  of  the  labourers  to  be  of  the  free  bounty  of 
God,  who  gives  liberally  to  all  that  serve  him  freely,  not 
measuring  the  recompense  to  the  work,  but  to  the  ready 
mind.  Men  are  to  lay  up  for  themselves  treasures  in 
heaven,  but  the  reason  is  that  where  the  treasure  is  stored 
there  will  the  heart  be  also.  Self-seeking  means  the  loss 
of  all.  He  that  would  save  his  soul  for  his  own  sake 
will  lose  it ;  he  that  shall  find  is  the  man  who  would  lose 
even  his  own  soul  for  the  Lord's  sake.' 

The  Christian  religion  is  founded  on  this  lofty  con- 
ception of  service  and  duty.  It  condemns  on  the  other 
hand  that  kind  of  asceticism  which  so  absorbs  all 
energies  into  the  service  of  God  as  to  leave  no  freedom 
for  the  service  of  man.  It  is  the  religion  not  of  in- 
dividual souls,  but  of  a  society  intended  to  embrace  all 
mankind.  Christian  duty  is  therefore  intimately  con- 
cerned with  social  relations.  There  are  indiN'idual  duties  ; 
but  they  are  concerned  rather  with  being  than  with  doing. 
The  man  is  bound  to  be  in  himself  what  God  would  have 
liim  be ;  and  yet  even  here  he  does  not  escape  from 
society,  for  social  relations  determine  his  being  what  he 
is  or  his  becoming  what  he  becomes.  His  doing  is  still 
more  predominantly  social.  Nothing  which  he  docs 
concerns  himself  alone.  There  are  two  main  command- 
ments, which  set  forth  a  man's  duty  towards  God  and 
his  duty  towards  his  neighbour.  But  these  are  not  two 
separable  duties,  so  that  a  man  should  be  able  to  do  the 
one  and  leave  the  other  undone.  The  ^^'ill  of  God  de- 
clared by  these  commandments  is  a  perfect  unity  ;  one,  as 
the  Divine  Nature  is  one  ;  and  therefore,  as  St.  James 
says,  he  who  stumbles  in  one  point  is  guilty  of  an  offence 
against  the  Law  taken  as  a  whole.     It  is  not  only  that  he 

'  ^Tatt.  vl.  18-20  ;  \ii.  i-S  j  xvi.  25;  xx.  1-16  ;  Mark  vii.  I-9; 
Luke  xi.  38  ;  xvii.  10,  33. 


Duty  28 1 

who  loves  God  is  commanded  to  love  his  brother  also ; 
he  who  pretends  to  be  loving  God  while  hating  his 
brother  is  a  liar.  So  St.  John  puts  it  sternly  and  abruptly. 
Such  religion  is  not  merely  defective ;  it  has  no  positive 
reality  at  all ;  "  for  he  that  loveth  not  his  brother  whom 
he  hath  seen,  cannot  love  God  whom  he  hath  not 
seen."  ^ 

Such  a  duty  therefore  as  that  of  worshipping  (iod 
is  not  merely  individual,  and  is  not  fulfilled  by  any 
individual  action.  Christian  worship  is  common  worship, 
the  act  of  the  whole  society.  The  two  or  three  who 
are  gathered  together  in  the  Name  of  Christ  worship 
not  by  themselves  apart,  but  in  the  unity  of  the  Name. 
An  individual  Christian  can  worship  (iod  acceptably 
in  isolation,  but  his  worship  is  acceptable  by  virtue 
of  his  habitual  union  with  his  fellows  in  the  Body  of 
Christ.  Those  ^^•ho  deliberately  forsake  the  assembling 
of  themselves  together  forfeit  the  right  of  worship,  the 
access  to  God  which  is  through  the  veil  of  the  Flesh  of 
Christ.  Nor  is  this  common  assembly  for  worship 
merely  a  matter  of  convenience.  It  is  the  outward  sign 
of  a  spiritual  unity  and  concord  which  is  necessary  to 
])erfect  Christian  worship.  St.  Paul  mingles  together 
exhortations  about  public  worship  and  mutual  benevolence 
so  as  to  make  them  seem  one  united  action.  We  are 
severally  members  one  of  another,  with  differing  gifts 
of  grace  : — ministering,  teaching,  exhorting  ;  love,  joy, 
fervour,  hospitality,  almsgiving  ;  all  are  conjoined.  The 
almsgiving  from  church  to  church  which  he  commanded 
"  not  only  fiUeth  up  the  measure  of  the  Avants  of  the  saints, 
but  *  aboundeth  also  through  many  thanksgivings,  unto 
God."  The  intense  liturgical  teaching  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  includes  the  same  rule  :  "  Through  him  let 
'  Jas.  ii.  10;    I  John  iv.  20,  21. 


2.S2        The  Elements  of  Chiistia/i   Doctrine 

us  offer  up  a  sacrifice  of  praise  to  God  continually,  that 
is,  the  fruit  of  lips  which  make  confession  to  his  name  ; 
but  to  do  good  and  to  communicate  forget  not  :  for  with 
such  sacrifices  God  is  well  pleased."  We  cannot  serve 
God  aright  without  simultaneously  serving  man/ 

On  the  other  hand  the  duty  of  a  Christian  to  his 
fellow-men  is  a  part  of  what  he  owes  to  God.  St.  James 
declares  the  incongruity  of  the  same  mouth  blessing  God 
and  cursing  men,  which  are  made  after  the  likeness  of 
God.  The  teaching  is  not  new ;  it  is  ancient  as  the 
Noachian  precepts,  where  manslaughter — more  especially, 
no  doubt,  sacrificial  slaughter — is  forbidden  expressly  on 
the  ground  that  man  is  made  in  the  image  of  God.  But 
this  obscure  and  limited  commandment  draws  a  new 
meaning  from  the  solidarity  of  mankind  in  the  Incarnate 
Son.  Every  man,  as  redeemed,  has  a  new  relation  to 
God,  and  a  new  sanctity.  An  injury  clone  to  him  is  a 
wrong  done  to  the  Son  of  Man.  The  ground  on  which 
St.  Paul  insists  on  the  consideration  due  to  the  weak  in 
conscience  is  the  fact  that  he  is  a  brother  for  whom  Christ 
died.  The  ground  for  doing  alms  in  secret  is  that,  all 
being  done  rather  for  God  than  for  man,  a  reward  may  be 
expected  from  God  alone.  "  AVhatsoever  ye  do,"  writes 
St.  Paul,  "  work  heartily,  as  unto  the  Lord,  and  not  unto 
men  ;  knowing  that  from  the  Lord  ye  shall  receive  the 
recompense  of  the  inheritance :  ye  serve  the  Lord 
Christ."  - 

The  social  character  of  Christian  duty  lends  importance 
to  the  far-reaching  precept :  "  Obey  them  that  have  the 
rule    over   you."       The    Apostles    were    peremptory   in 

'  Matt,  xviii.  20  ;  Rom.  xii.  5  13  ;  2  Cor.  ix.  12  ;  Ileb.  x.  20,  25  ; 
xiii.  15,  16. 

"^  Jas.  iii.  9  ;  Gen.  ix.  6  ;  Matt.  vi.  i  ;  Rom.  xiv.  15  ; 
I    Cor.  viii.  11  :  Col.  iii.  23,  24. 


Duty  283 

demanding  this  obedience.  "  If  any  man  obeyeth  not 
our  word  by  this  epistle,"  wrote  St.  Paul  to  the 
Thessalonians,  "  note  that  man,  that  ye  have  no  company 
with  him,  to  the  end  that  he  may  be  ashamed."  There 
is  an  authority  in  the  Church  that  must  be  obeyed.  It 
is  the  authority  of  the  Lord  himself,  according  to  his 
word,  "  He  that  heareth  you  heareth  me,  and  he  that 
rejecteth  you  rejecteth  me."  There  is  indeed  no  other 
source  for  any  real  authority.  The  magistrate  is  equally 
to  be  obeyed  as  God's  minister ;  to  be  obeyed  not  only 
for  wrath,  but  also  for  conscience  sake.  The  decrees  and 
ordinances  of  a  recognized  authority  in  Church  or  in 
State  have  a  Divine  sanction  ;  obedience  is  a  matter  of 
Christian  duty.^ 

But  here  is  a  question.  St.  Paul  contrasted  the 
freedom  of  the  Gospel  with  the  old  Law  that  was  con- 
tained in  dogmata  or  ordinances.  "  If  ye  died  with  Christ 
from  the  rudiments  of  the  world,  why,  as  though  living 
in  the  world,  do  ye  subject  yourselves  to  ordinances. 
Handle  not,  nor  taste,  nor  touch,  after  the  precepts  and 
doctrines  of  men  ?  "  The  rules  of  the  Old  Testament 
are  in  similar  language  put  on  one  side  in  the  Epistle  to 
the  Hebrews  as  merely  decrees  of  the  flesh  concerning 
meats  and  drinks  and  washings.  But  if  obedience  be 
a  Christian  duty,  why  are  these  rules  so  disparaged  and 
set  in  contrast  with  the  Christian  dispensation  ?  The 
question  becomes  the  more  urgent  when  we  find  St.  Paul 
himself  delivering  the  dogmata  of  the  Apostles  and 
Elders  to  be  kept  by  the  churches  of  Galatia,  and 
remember  that  these  dogmata  enjoined  abstinence  from 
blood  and  from  things  strangled.    Where  is  the  difference 

'  Ileb.  xiii.  17  ;  2  Thess.  iii.  14;  Luke  x.  16;  Rom.  xiii.  1-6; 
I  Pet,  ii.  13,  where  kt'ktis  apparently  means  an  iustilulion  by 
reference  to  the  primary  sense  of  kt'i^hv- 


284        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

between  such  ordinances  and  those  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment ?  ^ 

The  difference  lies  in  the  purpose.  There  is  a  well- 
known  distinction  between  things  wrong  in  themselves  and 
things  wrong  because  forbidden.  In  both  cases  alike 
the  wrong  consists  in  opposition  to  the  Will  of  God  ;  but 
in  the  latter  case  the  opposition  is  to  an  expression  of 
God's  Will  conditioned  by  human  circumstances.  An 
act  is  forbidden,  either  by  God  himself  or  by  those  having 
authority  from  him,  with  reference  to  a  mediate  end, 
distinct  from  that  union  with  God  which  is  the  ultimate 
end  of  man.  To  confuse  the  ends  will  be  to  miss  the 
purpose  of  the  prohibition,  and  so  to  confound  the 
Divine  order.  This  was  done  when  the  teachers  of 
Judaism  treated  the  distinction  of  clean  and  unclean  as 
a  distinction  in  the  nature  of  things,  or  when  they  counted 
a  man  righteous  for  his  observance  of  the  legal  j^recepts 
taken  in  themselves.  Such  obscuring  of  the  Divine 
purpose  was  so  essentially  immoral  that  St.  Paul  found 
it  necessary  even  to  condemn  the  doing  of  things  com- 
manded by  the  Law,  because  of  the  danger  of  miscon- 
ception. To  be  circumcised  and  to  keep  the  sabbath 
were  things  indifferent  in  themselves,  commanded  by  the 
Law  of  the  Old  Testament,  and  certainly  not  contrary  to 
the  Gospel ;  yet  when  the  Galatians  took  them  for  things 
good  and  necessary  in  themselves,  he  peremptorily  for- 
bade them.  They  were  good  only  so  far  as  done  by 
way  of  obedience  or  in  reference  to  a  mediate  end.-' 

An  ordinance  of  man,  whether  ecclesiastical  or  civil,  is 

'  Col.  ii.  20-22.  The  force  of  the  middle  So^yuart'^'fo-Se  should  be 
observed.  He  who  imposes  Srfy^uara  upon  himself  is  acting  not  in 
obedience  to  authority,  but  from  a  conviction  of  their  natural  inherent 
obligation.      Heb.  ix.    10,  Si/caioiyuaTa  o-opK(5s  ;  Acts  xv.  29  ;  xvi.  4. 

"■  Gal.  iv.  9-1 1  ;  v.  2-4. 


Duty  285 

to  be  obeyed  for  the  sake  of  obedience.  There  is  how- 
ever a  limit  to  this  obedience.  "  Whether  it  be  right  in 
the  sight  of  God,"  said  the  Apostles  before  the  Sanhedrin, 
"  to  hearken  unto  you  rather  than  unto  God,  judge  ye."  ' 
The  answer  is  self-evident.  Have  we  then  here  a 
conflict  of  duties  ?  To  suppose  this  possible  is  to  over- 
throw the  conception  of  duty ;  for  all  duty  must  be 
ultimately  resolved  into  the  obligation  to  do  the  Will 
of  God ;  and  a  conflict  of  duties  would  therefore  mean 
that  in  God  there  is  yea  and  nay.  The  apparent  con- 
tradiction is  solved  by  observing  that  no  ordinance  of 
man  is  to  be  obeyed  for  any  virtue  inherent  in  itself.  It 
is  of  value  only  as  an  expression,  more  or  less  imperfect, 
of  the  Will  of  God.  In  ordinary  cases  it  is  an  expression 
sufficient  to  command  obedience.  But  where  there  is  an 
expression  clearer  and  more  imperative,  that  is  to  be 
followed.  Between  this  and  that  expression  the  con- 
science must  judge,  and  the  individual  man  must  be 
responsible  for  the  judgment.  From  this  there  is  no 
escape.  But  though  the  apprehension  of  the  fact  depends 
on  the  individual,  the  fact  in  itself  does  not.  There  is  at 
every  moment  for  every  man  one  duty  only.  However 
general  a  law  may  be,  the  incidence  of  law  as  constitut- 
ing duty  is  individual.  Duty  is  for  me  what  God  wills  me 
now  to  do.     In  this  Will  there  can  be  no  contradiction. 

Holding  in  synthesis  the  general  law  and  the  individual 
incidence  of  duty,  the  objective  reality  of  obligation 
and  the  mass  of  conflicting  indications  from  which  it 
has  to  be  discerned,  we  shall  be  able  to  understand  the 
distinction  drawn  between  a  Precept  of  the  Gospel  and 
a  Counsel  of  Perfection.  Great  harm  is  done  to  religion 
if  the  distinction  is  supposed  to  lie  between  precepts  that 
are  binding  and  counsels  which  a  man  may  with  equal 
'  Acts  iv.  19. 


286        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

right  follow  or  neglect.  To  treat  the  Counsels  in  this 
way  is  faulty  not  only  because  it  implies  that  a  man  is 
not  bound  to  follow  after  perfection,  but  also  because  it 
removes  them  from  the  category  of  duty  altogether,  and 
thus  empties  of  meaning  some  of  the  most  impressive 
sayings  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  When  he  bade  the  rich  man, 
"  Go,  sell  that  thou  hast,  and  give  to  the  poor  :  and 
come,  follow  me,"  he  was  not  pointing  out  a  more 
expeditious  way  to  perfection,  which  might  be  taken  or 
left  at  pleasure ;  he  was  imposing  a  duty.  When  he  said 
to  his  disciples,  "  Resist  not  him  that  is  evil ;  but  who- 
soever smiteth  thee  on  thy  right  cheek,  turn  to  him  the 
other  also  ;  and  if  any  man  would  go  to  law  with  thee, 
and  take  away  thy  coat,  let  him  have  thy  cloke  also ;  and 
whosoever  shall  comijel  thee  to  go  one  mile,  go  with  him 
twain  ;  give  to  him  that  asketh  thee,  and  from  him  that 
would  borrow  of  thee  turn  not  thou  away  ;  "  he  was  not 
pointing  to  a  way  of  renunciation  that  was  open  to  them 
but  by  which  they  were  not  bound  to  walk ;  he  was 
formally  amending  the  laws  of  his  kingdom,  appointing 
a  direct  substitute  for  the  older  law  of  retaliation.'^ 

What  then  ?  The  distinction  is  perhaps  valid  if  we 
understand  by  a  Precept  that  which  is  always  and  equally 
applicable  under  all  conditions,  by  a  Counsel  that  which  is 
addressed  to  particular  persons  or,  if  general,  is  subject 
to  condition.  The  two  supreme  commandments,  to  love 
God  and  to  love  one's  neighbour,  summarize  all  Precepts, 
which  do  but  expand  these  in  detail  or  prohibit  actions 
which  are  necessarily  and  inherently  opposed  to  them. 
A  Counsel  is  a  direction  how  to  fulfil  these  command- 
ments in  the  varying  circumstances  of  life.  It  is  that 
which  is  promised  by  the  prophet :  "  Thine  ears  shall 
hear  a  word  behind  thee,  saying,  This  is  the  way,  walk 

'  Matt.  xix.  21  ;  v.  39-42. 


Duty  287 

ye  in  it,  when  ye  turn  to  the  right  hand,  and  when  ye  turn 
to  the  left."  But  the  man  who  receives  such  direction 
is  no  less  bound  to  follow  it  than  to  obey  the 'command- 
ment.    Counsel  engenders  duty  no  less  than  Precept.' 

The  Lord's  counsel  to  the  rich  young  man  was  clear 
and  imperative.  Circumstances  may  bring  exactly  the 
same  counsel  to  bear  upon  the  conscience  of  others,  as  of 
St.  Francis.  There  is  a  counsel  to  abstain  from  marriage, 
and  this  so  general  that  St.  Paul  could  say,  "  I  would 
that  all  men  were  even  as  I  myself."  But  the  Lord  said 
expressly,  "  All  men  cannot  receive  this  saying,  but  they 
to  whom  it  is  given."  Where  it  is  given  it  is  clearly  of 
obligation.  "  He  that  is  able  to  receive  it,  let  him 
receive  it."  To  receive  it  or  to  receive  it  not  is  alike  of 
God.  "  Each  man,"  says  St.  Paul,  "  hath  his  own  gift 
from  God,  one  after  this  manner,  and  another  after  that." 
Each  man  does  his  duty  by  walking  as  he  is  directed.-' 

The  purpose  of  God's  commandment  is  clear  and  un- 
mistakable. The  direction  how  to  fulfil  it  is  complicated 
by  the  circumstances  of  our  life.  It  is  but  rarely 
that  a  perfectly  clear  indication  is  given  to  any  one. 
The  counsels  addressed  to  Christians  in  general  are 
to  be  kept  always  in  view ;  the  final  direction  is 
derived  from  their  just  combination  with  every  other 
indication  of  God's  Will.  But  every  precept  also,  when 
applied  in  particular,  requires  this  adjustment.  The 
soldier  in  battle,  the  judge  who  condemns  a  murderer, 
or  the  officer  who  executes  him,  is  not  exempt  from  the 
commandment,  "  Thou  shalt  not  kill ;"  but  his  action  is 
determined  by  this  commandment  taken  in  combination 
with  the  intricate  circumstances  of  social  life,  every  one 
of  which  is  an  indication,  according  to  its  measure,  of  the 

'   Isa.  XXX.  21.     See  Note  R. 

'  Matt.  xix.  II,  12  :   i  Cor.  vii.  7. 


288        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Will  of  God.  Every  precept  and  every  counsel  would 
be  simply  obligatory  if  the  state  of  things  were  normal, 
as  God  would  have  it.  The  Sermon  on  the  Mount  is 
not,  as  some  foolish  readers  think,  incompatible  with 
social  life  ;  it  is  indeed  the  scheme  of  a  perfectly  normal 
society.  But  the  state  of  things  being  abnormal  through 
the  effects  of  sin,  complications  are  introduced.  If  all 
were  normal,  the  counsel,  Give  to  him  that  askdJi  tJm\ 
would  be  universally  binding,  since  no  one  would  ask 
who  ought  not  to  receive.  The  importunity  of  rogues 
introduces  a  complication,  which  is  not  to  be  disregarded  ; 
otherwise  the  observance  of  the  counsel  would  be  only  a 
partial  obedience  to  the  direction  received,  and  that  is 
no  obedience  at  all.  The  man  who  rightly  refuses  to 
give  alms  does  not  ignore  this  counsel  as  inapplicable 
to  his  case;  he  regards  it  in  due  combination  with 
all  circumstances,  and  so  finds  his  duty.  Writing  to 
Marcellinus,  who  in  his  character  of  Roman  magis- 
trate was  deeply  conscious  of  difificulties  in  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount,  St.  Augustine  showed  that  all  these 
jnecepts  and  counsels  are  to  be  observed  chiefly  in  prac- 
paratione  animi,  in  the  inward  disposition  of  the  heart, 
while  in  external  action  many  things  must  be  done, 
especially  by  the  executants  of  human  justice,  which  con- 
tradict their  letter  but  fulfil  their  purpose,' 

The  purpose  of  all  is  the  perfection  of  man  according 
to  the  Will  of  God.  By  whatever  step  the  attainment  of 
that  purpose  can  be  approached,  I  myself  or  through 
me  any  other  being  brought  nearer  to  perfection,  to  take 
that  step  is  my  pressing  duty.  Being  is  therefore  the 
end  of  doing ;  the  unity  of  the  Divine  Will  requires  the 
ultimate  resolution  of  the  duty  of  doing  into  the  duty  of 
being. 

■  Auj;.,  Ep.,  138,  c.  2. 


Perfection  289 

Sect.  III. — Perfection 

"  Ye  therefore  shall  be  perfect,"  said  the  Lord  to  his 
disciples,  "  as  your  heavenly  Father  is  perfect."  The 
standard  of  human  perfection  is  stated  by  St.  Paul ;  it  is 
the  measure  of  the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ.  He 
is  the  express  image  of  the  Father ;  he  is  therefore  the 
pattern  of  perfect  manhood,  the  realization  of  the  purpose 
in  which  God  created  man  after  his  own  likeness.  Our 
calling  is  to  be  conformed  to  his  image.^ 

We  must  look  closely  to  the  word  by  which  this  truth 
of  human  perfectibility  is  expressed.^  It  signifies  that 
which  is  come  to  its  own  proper  completion.  In  the 
simplest  use  it  means  a  full-grown  man,  one  whose  bodily 
development  is  complete,  and  who  has  the  use  of  all  his 
natural  faculties.  By  an  obvious  transition  it  is  used  to 
express  the  full  possession  of  supernatural  grace,  this  also 
being  required  for  the  completeness  of  man  according  to 
the  purpose  of  God.  In  no  other  sense  but  this  can  we 
take  the  promise  of  the  Lord  and  the  aspiration  of  St. 
Paul.  The  perfect  man  according  to  the  measure  of 
Christ  is  the  man  who  has  grown  to  the  utmost  in  the 
grace  and  knowledge  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  man  in 
whom  Christ  is  formed,  and  who  is  conformed  to  his  image. 
But  this  entire  conformation  to  the  Divine  idea  becomes 
possible  only  to  those  who  see  God  as  he  is.  "  We 
know,"  says  St.  John,  "  that  if  he  shall  be  manifested  we 
shall  be  like  him ;  for  we  shall  see  him  even  as  he  is." 
For  this  cause  it  is  not  yet  made  manifest  what  we  shall 
be.  "  Now  we  see  in  a  mirror,  darkly,"  says  St.  Paul, 
"  but  then  face  to  face  :  now  I  know  in  part ;  but  then 

'  Matt.  V.  48  ;  Eph.  iv.  13  ;  Rom.  viii.  29. 
-  The  word  reAeios  and  its  congeners.     See  Note  S. 

U 


290        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

shall  I  know  even  as  also  I  have  been  known."  Perfec- 
tion is  thus  a  promise  of  the  future  ;  in  hope  of  this 
promise  a  Christian  man  labours  to  purify  himself ;  but 
the  work  is  not  yet  complete,  nor  can  be  in  our  present 
state.  "  We  know  in  part,"  says  St.  Paul,  "  but  when 
that  which  is  perfect  is  come,  that  which  is  in  part  shall 
be  done  away."  Perfection  is  not  for  this  life,  but  for 
the  life  which  is  to  come.^ 

There  is  however  a  lower  grade  of  advancement  which 
is  also  called  perfection.  ^'  We  speak  wisdom,"  says  St. 
Paul,  "  among  the  perfect " — men,  that  is  to  say,  who 
are  called  perfect  though  still  living  the  life  of  the  flesh. 
He  assures  the  Colossians  that  prayers  are  being  made 
for  them  to  the  end  they  may  stand  perfect.  In  writing 
to  the  Philippians,  he  puts  the  two  kinds  of  perfection 
vividly  in  contrast.  "  Not  that  I  have  already  obtained, 
or  am  already  made  perfect,"  he  says  \  "  I  count  not 
myself  yet  to  have  apprehended :  but  one  thing  I  do, 
forgetting  the  things  which  are  behind,  and  stretching 
forward  to  the  things  which  are  before,  I  press  on 
toward  the  goal."  He  then  immediately  adds  the 
exhortation,  "  Let  us  therefore,  as  many  as  be  perfect, 
be  thus  minded."  - 

In  the  language  of  ascetic  theology  these  grades  are 
distinguished  as  perfedio  patriae  znd  perfectio  viae.  The 
one  is  the  perfection  of  the  end,  the  other  is  the  perfection 
of  the  means.  The  one  is  the  perfection  which  belongs 
to  him  only  who  has  attained  to  the  heavenly  country, 
and  sees  God  face  to  face,  knowing  as  he  is  known ;  the 
other  is  the  perfection  of  the  pilgrim  in  the  way,  who  is 
completely  furnished  with  all  that  is  needful  for  his 
journey,  and  whose  mind  is  wholly  bent  on  its  fulfilment. 

'  2  Pet.  iii.  18  ;  Gal.  iv.  19  ;   i  John  iii.  2,  3  ;  I  Cor.  xiii.  9-12. 
*  I  Cor.  ii.  6  ;  Col.  iv.  12  ;  Phil.  iii.  12-15. 


Perfection  291 

The  entire  adaptation  of  the  means  to  the  end  makes  the 
state  of  pilgrimage  continuous  with  the  state  of  attain- 
ment. But  if  this  were  all,  it  would  still  be  hard  to  see 
how  any  approach  to  the  end  can  be  called  perfection. 
To  be  going  in  the  way,  with  whatever  steadiness  and 
whatever  assurance  of  the  result,  is  not  the  same  as  to 
arrive;  an  approach  to  perfection  is  indeed  the  very 
negative  of  perfection.  Nor  can  we  solve  the  difficulty 
by  taking  the  man  perfect  in  the  way  to  be  one  who  has 
attained  to  the  full  measure  of  grace  which  is  attainable 
in  his  present  condition.  Such  might  be  called  a  relative 
perfection  \  but  such  is  not  the  meaning  of  St.  Paul  when 
he  urges  those  who  are  perfect  to  be  ever  pressing  on- 
ward. There  is  indeed  no  halting-place  of  perfection 
according  to  a  standard  of  this  life.  There  is  but  one 
standard,  the  measure  of  the  fulness  of  Christ,  and  the 
Christian  life  is  continual  growth  and  approximation 
thereto. 

A  man  is  perfect  when  he  becomes  what  God  wills 
him  to  be.  To  seek  perfection  is  therefore  to  endeavour 
the  fulfilment  of  the  duty  of  being.  But  the  obligation 
of  duty  is  limited  by  a  man's  powers ;  no  one  is  bound 
to  the  impossible.  Shall  we  then  say  that  every  man  is 
perfect  when  at  each  stage  of  his  progress  he  has  made 
all  the  advance  that  was  possible  according  to  the 
grace  given  ?  This  is  true  in  a  sense.  He  is  become  at 
the  moment  what  God  wills  him  to  be  at  the  moment. 
But  growth  is  not  a  succession  of  determinate  moments. 
It  does  not  proceed  up  to  a  certain  point,  then  cease 
and  begin  afresh.  Nor  is  there  a  succession  of  standards 
proposed,  to  which  a  man  may  attain  one  by  one,  and 
having  attained  find  ever  a  fresh  one  before  him. 
The  one  supreme  end  is  set  before  him  from  the  be- 
ginning, to  be  perfect   even  as  the  Father  is   perfect; 


292        TJlb  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

from  the  first,  as  at  every  stage,  he  is  to  press  toward 
the  one  goal  of  his  calhng.  If  then  he  can  be  called 
perfect  while  still  in  the  way,  it  is  because  in  some  sense 
he  has  already  attained  the  goal.  In  one  sense  he  is  still 
pressing  onward,  in  another  sense  he  has  arrived ;  in  one 
sense  he  is  still  striving  for  the  prize,  in  another  sense  he 
has  received  it ;  in  one  sense  he  is  still  growing  up  to  the 
measure  of  Christ,  in  another  sense  he  is  perfect.  It  is  as 
when  St.  Paul  tells  us  that  our  citizenship  is  even  now  in 
heaven ;  or  as  when  we  are  assured  that  even  now  we  are 
come  to  the  heavenly  Jerusalem,  and  to  the  spirits  of  just 
men  made  perfect,^  The  fulfilment  of  the  duty  of  being 
is  not  only  an  aspiration  for  the  future ;  it  is  a  present 
obligation. 

A  man  is  counted  perfect  in  the  way  out  of  regard 
either  to  his  condition  or  to  his  life.  He  is  perfect  in  so 
far  as  he  is  a  full  member  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  the 
Communion  of  Saints,  the  society  of  just  men  made 
perfect,  the  general  assembly  of  the  Firstborn  who  are 
enrolled  in  heaven.  There  is  nothing  of  less  or  more  in 
this  membership.  The  saints  who  have  attained  are  not 
in  any  fuller  sense  admitted  to  the  covenant  of  grace 
than  are  those  who  rank  lowest.  The  Church  is  con- 
tinuous in  earth  and  heaven,  and  those  on  earth  are 
equally  with  those  in  heaven  citizens  of  the  heavenly 
commonwealth.  It  is  clear  that  St.  Paul  is  using  the 
word  in  this  mystic  sense  of  those  fully  initiated  into  the 
Christian  religion,  when  he  writes  of  speaking  wisdom 
among  the  perfect,  and  when  he  exhorts  all  that  are 
perfect  to  press  onward  to  the  goal.  In  the  same  sense 
perhaps,  but  with  an  ironical  glance  at  the  ethical  mean- 
ing, he  asks  the  Galatians  whether,  having  begun  in  the 
Spirit,  they  are  now  being  perfected  in  the  flesh.  This 
'  Phil.  iii.  20  ;  Ileb.  xii.  23. 


Perfection  293 

also  is  the  perfection  to  which  in  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  Christian  neophytes  are  urged  to  go  forward.^ 
The  ethical  meaning  is  indeed  never  to  be  ignored.  There 
is  in  the  Christian  religion  no  such  thing  as  a  merely 
ceremonial  perfection.  Initiation  to  the  mysteries  of  the 
faith  is  introduction  to  the  stores  of  grace  by  Avhich  the 
life  that  now  is  may  be  sanctified.  But  in  the  sacra- 
mental aspect  the  initiation  is  complete;  the  baptized 
who  has  gone  forward  to  the  higher  mysteries  of  the 
faith  enjoys  the  full  privileges  of  the  household  of  God, 
and  is  so  far  a  perfect  Christian. 

This  truth  of  the  mystical  perfection  of  all  Christians 
was  obscured  by  the  mediaeval  doctrine  of  the  State  of 
Perfection.  By  this  was  meant  the  condition  or  stand- 
ing within  the  Church  of  those  who  were  specially  and 
solemnly  bound  to  the  observance  of  the  Counsels.  In 
dealing  with  this  matter  St.  Thomas  Aquinas  was  reduced 
to  sore  straits.  He  could  not  but  see  that  Christian  per- 
fection essentially  consists  in  the  observance  of  the  pre- 
cepts of  charity ;  the  counsels  are  intended,  he  says,  to 
remove  certain  hindrances  to  active  charity,  and  so  are 
only  means  to  the  fulfilment  of  the  precepts.  Now  the 
State  of  Perfection  is  for  him  the  condition  of  a  man  who 
is  not  indeed  actually  perfect,  but  is  solemnly  bound  to 
those  things  which  belong  to  perfection.  But  all  Chris- 
tians are  by  the  solemnity  of  baptism  bound  to  observe 
the  precepts  of  charity,  in  which  observance  perfection 
essentially  consists.  It  should  follow  that  all  are  in  the 
State  of  Perfection.  But  the  better  sense  of  St.  Thomas 
was  overpowered  by  the  supposed  authority  of  the  pseudo- 
Dionysius,  to  whose  writings,  from  the  conceit  of  his 
being  the  immediate  disciple  of  St.  Paul,  a  value  was 
attributed  hardly  inferior  to  that  of  the  Apostolic  Epistles. 
'  Gal.  iii.  3  ;  Heb.  vi.  i. 


294       TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

According  to  his  teaching  monks  and  bishops — the  latter 
at  the  cost  of  some  ingenuity — were  distinguished  from 
the  clergy  and  from  all  other  Christians  as  being  exclu- 
sively in  the  State  of  Perfection.  For  St.  Thomas,  as  much 
later  for  the  stalwart  common  sense  of  the  Chancellor 
Gerson,  this  was  a  purely  technical  distinction.  Not  all 
who  are  in  the  State  of  Perfection,  he  says,  are  even  in 
the  state  of  grace,  much  less  perfect,  and  some  on  the 
other  hand  have  perfection  of  life  who  are  not  in  the 
State  of  Perfection.  Many  of  the  married,  says  Gerson, 
are  and  have  been  perfect  in  the  Christian  life ;  but  they 
have  not  the  State  of  Perfection,  he  adds  with  simplicity, 
because  the  married  state  is  not  called  the  State  of  Per- 
fection.^ It  was  therefore  little  more  than  a  matter  of 
words,  but  as  usual  words  had  power  over  thought,  and 
this  meaningless  teaching  about  Perfection  has  had  strange 
consequences,  by  no  means  confined  to  those  who  bow  to 
the  scholastic  theology.  It  has  directly  produced  the 
idea  that  a  lower  level  of  morality  is  proper  to  some 
Christians,  a  higher  to  others.  Indirectly,  by  revulsion 
from  the  nominal  perfection  of  the  cloister,  it  has  pro- 
duced the  widely  spread  notion  that  perfection  is  not  in 
any  sense  for  this  life,  and  that  in  aspiring  to  it  men  are 
guilty  of  something  like  presumption.  Both  ideas  work 
together  in  lowering  the  accepted  standard  of  duty  antl 
the  service  of  God.  They  engender  what  is  vaguely  but 
sufficiently  described  as  worldliness  in  religion. 

If  we  say  that  all  Christians  are  normally  in  a  state  of 

'  Snmma  TheoL,  2-2.  1 84.  3,4,  and  5  ;  Gerson,  De  Consil.  Evang., 
torn.  iii.  col.  346,  ed.  1606  :  "  Multi  sunt  perfect!  et  fuerunt  in  vita 
spiritual],  qui  non  sunt  in  statu  perfectionis.  Patet  de  multis  coniu- 
gatis  qui  sunt  ct  fuerunt  perfecti  in  vita  Christiani,  nee  tameu  liabent 
stalum  perfectionis,  quoniam  status  coniugalisnon  dicilur  status  per- 
fectionis."    lie  deplores  also  the  truth  of  the  con%-crsc. 


Perfection  295 

perfection,  we  do  not  suppose  them  to  be  attaining  the 
standard  which  is  set  before  them,  nor  on  the  other  hand 
are  we  speaking  of  a  merely  nominal  perfection.  We  do 
not  propose  a  measure  of  Christian  excellence  proper  to 
the  life  \yhich  is  lived  in  the  world,  adjusted  to  the  present 
capacities  and  limitations  of  humanity ;  still  less  a  measure 
set  by  the  ordinary  attainments  even  of  the  best  among 
Christians.  The  one  standard  set  is  the  measure  of  the 
stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ,  The  whole  progress  of 
the  Christian  life  is  nothing  else  but  an  approximation 
to  this  measure.  We  do  not  suppose  the  limit  reached 
until  fulness  of  knowledge  is  acquired  in  the  world  to 
come;  indeed  we  cannot  think  of  ultimate  perfection 
without  the  redemption  of  the  body  in  the  resurrection. 
But  in  this  world  also  there  is  a  perfection  that  is  real ; 
the  perfection  of  state  or  condition  to  which  men  are 
raised  by  the  power  of  grace  ;  a  perfection  also  of  life 
and  character. 

The  perfect  man  is  he  who  fulfils  the  end  of  his  being, 
keeping  God's  commandments.  Can  this  be  done? 
What  is  it  to  walk  in  all  the  commandments  of  the  Lord 
with  a  perfect  heart  ?  It  is  to  have  the  affection  and  the 
will  so  set  upon  doing  the  will  of  God  that  no  room  is 
left  for  any  contrary  purpose.  Ultimate  salvation  is 
secured  by  enduring  or  persevering  to  the  end,  refusing 
to  be  drawn  aside  from  the  way.  "  Let  patience  have  its 
perfect  work,"  says  St.  James — patience,  that  is  to  say, 
in  the  active  sense  of  continuous  effort — "that  ye  may 
be  perfect  and  entire,  lacking  in  nothing."  He  who 
thus  sets  his  face  as  a  flint,  looking  to  the  end,  may 
still  be  far  from  ultimate  perfection,  or  even  from  the 
full  knowledge  of  his  aim,  but  he  is  perfect  in  the  way.^ 

'  Matt.  X.  22  ;  Jas.  i.  4.  The  only  places  of  the  New  Testament 
in  which  inrofiovri  is  used  in  the  passive  sense  of  endurance  are 
2  Cor,  i.  6  J  Rev.  i.  9  ;  and  perhaps  2  Thess.  iii.  5. 


296       TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Nor  is  he  perfect  only  by  intention.  The  end  of  the 
commandment,  says  St.  Paul,  is  charity,  which  is  the  ful- 
filment of  the  Law.  But  charity  is  not  a  virtue  for  the 
acquisition  of  which  we  have  to  wait ;  it  is  not  like  that 
knowledge  upon  knowledge  which  can  be  attained  only 
with  the  vision  of  God.  It  abides  even  now,  with  faith 
and  hope.  These  are  exclusively  proper  to  the  life  that 
now  is ;  but  unlike  them  and  all  other  gifts,  charity  never 
faileth.  The  love  that  is  now  possible  for  us  does  not 
differ  in  kind  from  the  love  that  shall  be,  as  the  know- 
ledge that  we  now  have  in  part  differs  from  the  knowledge 
upon  knowledge  of  the  life  to  come,  or  as  hope  differs 
from  possession.  Love  is  continuous  now  and  for  ever, 
growing  only  to  a  greater  intensity  when  He  shall  be  seen 
and  known,  whom  not  having  seen  we  love ;  on  whom, 
though  now  we  see  him  not,  yet  believing,  we  rejoice 
with  joy  unspeakable  and  full  of  glory,  receiving  even 
now  the  end  of  our  faith,  the  salvation  of  our  souls.  He 
who  loves  God  is  therefore  already  attaining  perfection. 
AVhile  still  in  the  way  to  that  ultimate  perfection  which  is 
the  object  of  his  striving,  he  already  possesses  that  in 
which  it  will  consist.  He  has  yet  something  to  cast 
away,  burdens  and  hindrances  of  the  pilgrimage ;  but  he 
has  also  that  which  he  will  keep,  the  essential  immortal 
blessedness  of  the  life  to  come.  This  is  the  perfection 
of  the  Christian  character  in  the  way.  Charity  is  the 
bond  of  perfectness ;  it  links  our  imperfect  efforts  to  the 
heavenly  consummation.^ 

This  perfection  is  not  a  remote  goal  of  long-continued 

'  I  Tim.  i.  5.  Something  is  lost  by  a  rendering  which  seems 
to  referiropa^yeAi'o  exclusively  to  the  specific  charge  which  Timothy 
was  to  deliver  at  Ephesus.  Rom.  xiii.  10 ;  I  Cor.  xiii.  8-13. 
Observe  again  the  distinction  of  ■yvZ(Ti%  and  iTriyvcua-is,  nt  supra, 
p.  102.     I  Pet.  i.  8  ;  Col.  iii.  14. 


Perfection  297 

effort.  It  is  the  present  possession  of  those  who  in  the 
strength  of  Christian  fellowship  and  mutual  prayer  stand 
perfect  and  complete  in  all  the  will  of  God.  There 
is  a  fulness  of  the  Christian  life  attainable  in  the  way, 
which  may  be  spoken  of  in  words  like  these  :  "  I  bow 
my  knees  unto  the  Father,  from  whom  every  family  in 
heaven  and  on  earth  is  named,  that  he  would  grant  you, 
according  to  the  riches  of  his  glory,  that  ye  may  be 
strengthened  with  power  through  his  Spirit  in  the  in- 
ward man ;  that  Christ  may  dwell  in  your  hearts  through 
faith ;  to  the  end  that  ye,  being  rooted  and  grounded  in 
love,  may  be  strong  to  apprehend  with  all  the  saints  what 
is  the  breadth  and  length  and  height  and  depth,  and  to 
know  the  love  of  Christ  which  passeth  knowledge,  that  ye 
may  be  filled  unto  all  the  fulness  of  God."  ^ 

To  know  the  love  of  Christ  which  passeth  knowledge, 
is  not  to  be  a  passive  recipient  of  mystic  illumination.  It 
is  to  be  active  in  the  whole  life  of  the  society  of  which 
Christ  is  the  Head,  which  he  loves,  and  for  which  he  gave 
himself.  "  Whoso  keepeth  his  word,"  says  St.  John,  "  in 
him  verily  is  the  love  of  God  perfected."  To  keep  his 
word  is  to  hold  fast  to  his  commandment ;  and  his 
commandment  is  that  we  love  the  brethren.  "  If  we  love 
one  another,  God  abideth  in  us,  and  his  love  is  per- 
fected in  us."  ^  The  social  character  of  Christian  perfec- 
tion is  thus  revealed,  showing  the  combination  of  its 
two  aspects,  the  mystical  and  the  practical.  It  is  the 
perfection  of  the  man  who,  being  fully  initiated  into  the 
privileges  of  the  Christian  Church,  steadily  endeavours  to 
fulfil  the  obligations  of  his  calling.  Fortified  by  all  the 
means  of  grace  which  are  proper  to  his  condition,  he 
wilfully  neglects  no  single  duty.     He  takes  the  Christian 

'  Col.  iv.  12  ;  Eph.  iii.  14-19- 
*  I  John  ii.  5  ;  iv.  12. 


298       The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Religion  as  a  whole,  without  partiality,  without  hypocrisy. 
He  is  imperfect  as  yet  in  the  measure  of  his  attainment, 
always  advancing  and  reaching  out  to  that  which  is 
before.  He  is  perfect  in  the  determination  of  his 
aifection  to  do  the  good  and  acceptable  and  perfect  will 
of  God. 


APPENDIX 


Some  notes  are  here  collected  wliicJi  were  too  long 
for  t  he  foot  of  the  page 

A  (p.  36). 

The  following  excerpts  are  taken  from  the  Sylloge  Covfessiomtm, 
ed.  Oxon.  1804  : — 

(a)  Helvetica,  p.  66,  "  Ministrorum  origo,  institutio  et  functio 
vetustissima  et  ipsius  Dei,  non  nova  aut  hominum  est  ordinatio." 

(1^)  Atigiistana,  p.  189,  "  Sic  autem  sentiunt  ijotestatem  clavium, 
seu  potestatem  episcoporum,  iuxta  Evangelium,  potestatem  esse  seu 
mandatum  Dei,  praedicandi  Evangelii,  remittendi  et  retinendi  pec- 
cata,  et  administrandi  Sacramenta." 

(c)  Saxonica,  p.  240,  "  P'ilius  Dei  est  summa  sacerdos,  unctus  ah 
aeterno  Patre,  qui  ut  non  funditus  intereat  Ecclesia,  ministros 
Evangelii  ei  attribuit,  partim  a  se  immediate  vocatos,  ut  Prophetas 
et  Apostolos,  partim  vocatione  humana  electos." 

(d)  Belg/ca,  p.  311,  "  Credimus  Ministros,  Seniores,  et  Diaconos 
debere  ad  functiones  illas  suas  vocari  et  promoveri  legitima  Ecclesiae 
electione,  adhibita  ad  earn  seria  Dei  invocatione,  alque  eo  ordine 
et  modo  qui  nobis  Dei  verbo  praescribitur." 

B  (p.  58). 

The  words  of  St.  Augustine  were  eagerly  debated  in  the  fifteenth 
century,  when  the  question  of  the  absolute  authority  of  a  General 
Council  representing  the  Catholic  Church  was  to  the  fore.  Thomas 
Netter  (Waldensis),  the  Carmelite  opponent  of  Wickliffe,  was  the 
author  of  the  comparison  mentioned  in  the  text  {Doctrin.  Fid.,  ii., 
art.  2,  c.  2l).  William  of  Ockham  had  previously  argued  that  by 
the  Catholic  Church  St.  Augustine  meant  all  the  faithful  from  the 

299 


300       Tlie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

Hrst,  including  of  course  the  Evangelists  ;  and  the  authority  of  the 
whole,  he  ingeniously  contended,  is  greater  than  that  of  the  part. 
(See  hh  Dial,  in  Goldast,  Monarch.  S.  R.  Imp.,  torn.  ii.  p.  402). 

Calvin  hung  between  these  two  explanations,  but  he  preferred 
that  of  Waldensis,  giving  it  however  his  own  peculiar  colour.  He 
says  {Inst,,  I.  vii.  3)  that  St.  Augustine  used  these  words,  "signifi- 
cans  se,  quum  alienus  esset  a  fide,  non  aliter  potuisse  adduci  ut 
Evangelium  amplecteretur  pro  certa  Dei  veritate,  quam  ecclesiae 
auctoritate  victum."  A  little  below  he  adds,  "  Fatemur  eos  qui 
nondum  Spiritu  Dei  sunt  illuminati  Ecclesiae  reverentia  ad  docili- 
tatem  induci,  ut  Christi  fidem  ex  Evangelic  discere  sustineant." 
That  is  to  say,  the  testimony  of  the  Church  influences  unbelievers 
only ;  when  once  they  become  believers  they  have  an  apprehension 
of  the  truth  at  first  hand. 

This  is  certainly  not  St.  Augustine's  meaning.  He  is  arguing 
that  it  is  useless  for  the  Manichaean  teacher  to  appeal  to  the  Gospel 
in  support  of  his  doctrine :  the  doctrine  was  condemned  by  the 
Church,  and  "  Evangelio  non  crederem,"  etc.  Clearly  then  he  means 
that  the  text  of  the  Gospel  may  not  be  set  in  opposition  to  the 
current  teaching  of  the  Church.  In  the  previous  chapter  he  had 
made  it  plain  what  he  meant  by  the  authority  of  the  Catholic 
Church.  The  explanation  of  Ockham  is  included:  "  ab  ipsa  sede 
Petri  Apostoli  .  .  .  usque  ad  praesentem  episcopatum  successio 
sacerdotum."  But  also  the  present  teaching  of  Christendom  is 
included:  "  consensio  populorum  atque  gentium;"  and  the  pre- 
vailing standard  of  orthodoxy  :  "  Tenet  postremo  ipsum  Catholicae 
nomen,  cum  omnes  haeretici  se  catholicos  dici  velint,  quaerenli 
tanien  peregrino  alicui,  ubi  ad  Catholicam  conveniatur,  nullus 
haereticorum  vel  basilicam  suam  vel  domum  audeat  ostendere." 


C  (pp.  114  and  184). 

In  I  Cor.  ii.  14  and  xv.  46  much  confusion  has  been  caused  by 
rendering  t^vxikos  natural.  The  rendering  sensual  in  Jas.  iii.  15 
and  Jude  19  is  less  objectionable,  but  still  unsatisfactory.  'S.wiia 
^vxi-Ktiv  would  naturally  mean  animal  body,  as  rendered  in  the  Latin 
Vulgate,  corpus  animate;  but  unfortunately  we  use  the  word 
animal  in  a  sense  which  would  be  still  more  misleading.  It  is 
true  that  when  vf/^x^  is  set  in  contrast  with  -nvtvua,  it  properly 
signifies  the  animal  soul,  the  mere  animating  principle  of  the  body, 
as  in  I  Thcss.  v.  23,  7ri/eC^o  being  the  soul  regarded  in  its  liigher  or 


Appendix  301 

rational  character.  But  in  these  passages  St.  Paul  is  making  a 
different  distinction  ;  >|/ux^  is  here  the  human  soul,  and  Trvev/xa  the 
Divine  influence.  He  does  not  classify  the  fust  man  with  the  brutes, 
but  distinguishes  the  natural  faculties  of  the  human  soul  from  the 
supernatural  endowments  which  flow  from  the  Incarnation.  The 
English  rendering  natural iox  -^vx^kos  is  therefore  justifiable,  though 
it  is  rather  a  gloss  than  a  translation,  and  it  certainly  lends  itself  to 
much  misconception. 

The  comment  of  B.  de  Picquigny  on  ii.  i6  is  excellent  sense :  "  Ut 
animalis  homo  spiritualem  iudicare  posset,  deberet  Dei  mentem  et 
secreta  melius  nosse  quam  norit  homo  spiritualis  :  at  non  cognoscit 
ea  ;  vel  enim  ilia  naturaliter  et  vi  luminis  naturalis  nosset,  quod 
est  impossibile  ;  vel  supernaturaliter,  Deo  scilicet  revelante  ;  scd 
supponitur  contrarium,  cum  supponatur  animalis,  seu  solius  animae 
natural!  lumine  ductus."  And  above  :  '■^Spiritualis  tripliciter  sumi- 
lur.  I'\  Qui  cibo  non  eget :  ut  Christus  nunc.  2".  Qui  spiritus  dic- 
tamen  sequitur.     3°.   Qui  sublimiora  fidei  mysteria  intelligit." 

D  (p.  127). 

The  passage  cited  from  St.  Athanasius,  Contra  Gentes,  p.  8,  is  as 
follows  : — Oi5/c  apKf0e7aa  Se  rjf  tt)s  /co/cias  iirivoia  f]  twv  avOpdncov 
ijjvxVt  Kar'  uXiyov  koI  ets  to  x«^poi/a  kavrrjv  i^ayetv  ijp^aro'  /.LaOovcra 
yap  Statpopas  7]Soi/cioi'  Koi  ^wcrafxiuri  T7}v  twv  Btiuv  \ri6r]P,  ■JjSo/j.evri  Si  koI 
Trpos  TO.  Tov  awjxaros  irddri,  koI  irphs  jxova  to,  TrapSvra,  Kal  ras  tovtcov 
6o'|as  aTTO/SAeVouda,  eVo'/xure  firiSiv  en  izKeov  ilvai  twp  ^\eno/iievu'U, 
a\\a  /j.6va  to.  npSffKaipa  Koi  ra  (TooixaTiKo.  elvai  ra  Ka\a  '  aTroarpacpiTffa 
Se  Kol  iiriKaQofXiVT]  kavTrjv  ilvai  ko/t  eiKSva  tov  ayadov  Qiov,  ovk  en 
fiffSia  TTJs  eV  avrfj  Svvdfj.fws  rhv  Qehv  A6yov  koS'  ov  Kal  yiyoviv  bpa  ' 
«|a)  5e  eouTTjs  yevofxei/ri  to,  ovk  ovra  Xoyi^iTai  Kal  avarviroxnai. 
'Eiri.Kpv\pa(ra  yap  rais  iTrnr\oKa'is  tSif  (ToijiaTiKcop  (iriBvuiaiv  rb  ws  eV 
aiiTT)  KaToirrpov,  5t'  ov  fxivov  opciv  r\hvvaT0  t)]v  e'lKova  tov  TlaTpbi, 
ovKeTt  fj.fl/  bpa  &  Sel  if  ux^''  voilv  '  TravTl  Se  irepKpepeTai,  koI  fx6va  iKe7va 
bpa  TO.  Tij  aladr](Tii  ■npocnn.TTTOVTa. 

I  offer  the  following  translation  : — 

The  human  soul,  not  content  with  devising  wickedness,  began 
little  by  little  to  put  forth  on  yet  worse  ventures.  For  learning 
varieties  of  pleasure,  and  girding  itself  with  forgetfulness  of  divine 
things,  finding  pleasure  also  in  the  very  passions  of  the  body,  and 
looking  only  to  things  present  and  the  opinions  current  about  them, 
it  came  to  the  conclusion  that  nothing  at  all  existed  beyond  what  is 


302        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

seen,  the  Good  being  found  only  in  things  temporal  and  corporeal. 
So  turning  aside  and  forgetting  its  own  being  in  the  image  of  the 
good  God,  the  soul  no  longer  sees  by  its  inherent  power  the  Divine 
Word  after  which  it  was  made  ;  but  passes  out  of  itself  to  con- 
ceive and  imagine  things  that  are  not.  For  having  hidden  beneath 
the  folds  of  bodily  desires  the  mirror,  so  to  speak,  that  is  within  it, 
by  which  alone  the  Image  of  the  Father  could  be  seen,  the  soul 
no  longer  sees  what  it  should  rightly  understand,  but  turning  every 
way  sees  those  things  only  which  are  the  objects  of  sense. 


E  (pp.  173  and  177). 

The  extravagant  teaching  of  Calvinists  and  Jansenists  on  the  sub- 
ject of  grace  was  not  a  new  product  of  the  seventeenth  century. 
It  was  inherited  from  the  Thomist  theologians  of  the  mediaeval 
schools,  who  in  their  turn  were  but  continuing  the  tradition  of  the 
less  guarded  utterances  of  St.  Augustine.  Towards  the  end  of  the 
sixteenth  century  the  Jesuits  became  the  champions  of  a  more 
temperate  theology,  but  in  stress  of  controversy  they  almost 
inevitably  ran  to  the  other  extreme,  as  also  did  the  Remonstrants 
in  Holland.  The  disputes  of  Calvinists  and  Arminians  among  the 
Reformed  were  almost  exactly  parallel  with  the  controversy  which 
raged  at  the  same  time  in  the  Roman  Communion.  The  Synod  of 
Dordrecht  was  engaged  with  the  same  questions  as  the  Congrega- 
tion de  mixiliis  gratiae,  which  after  some  years  of  fruitless  discussion 
was  dissolved  in  1607  by  the  Pope  Paul  V.,  who  tried  to  silence 
the  controversy.  This  did  not  however  prevent  the  authorities 
of  the  Roman  Church  from  condemning,  for  the  most  part  with 
conspicuous  wisdom,  the  exaggerated  statements  on  either  side 
which  characterized  the  debate  arising  out  of  the  Augiisiinus  of 
Cornelius  Jansen.  These  were  chiefly  concerned  with  the  power 
of  regenerate  man  to  keep  God's  commandments,  about  which 
Pascal  discoursed  with  more  wit  than  fairness  in  the  Provincial 
Letters,  and  the  still  deeper  questions  of  sufficient  and  efl'ectual 
grace.  The  Jansenists,  holding  that  effectual  grace  is  irresistible, 
that  no  man  can  be  saved  without  it,  and  that  God  bestows  it  by 
his  sovereign  power  on  whom  he  will,  were  driven  by  the  logic  of 
their  position  to  assert  that  the  gift  of  sufficient  grace  alone  does 
but  increase  a  man's  damnation.  One  of  them  launched  out  into 
the  extravagance  of  saying  that  we  might  reasonably  pray  in  the 


Appendix  303 

Litany,  A  gratia  sufficienti,  Libt-ra  nos  Doinine.     The  proposition 
was  among  those  condemned  by  Alexander  VIII.  in  1690. 

F  (p.  iSi). 

Heb.  vi.  4-6.  The  explanation  given  in  the  text  is  that  of  St. 
Ambrose,  De  Faenit.,  ii.  2,  who  is  in  agreement  with  the  great 
majority  of  the  ancient  Fathers.  St.  Athanasius  (Op.,  torn.  i.  p. 
974)  lays  the  chief  stress  on  avaKaiviCuv.  He  says,  'E0paiots  yap 
i-yparpe  •  kuI  '(va  fj.T]  vo/xiaooffi  Kara  tV  f"  "rf  vo/xcf)  (rvvr)diiav 
npo<pd(Tei  ixiTwolas  ehat  TroWd  Ka9'  rjixepav  0anTi(rfj.ara,  Sid  tovto 
I.UTavoi'iv  fj.\v  irapaivil,  fiiav  5e  ehai  ttjp  dvaKaiviffiv  Sid  rod 
$airTi(T/xaTos  Kal  /xrj  Sivrepav  dirofaiviTai.  In  2  Cor.  iv.  16  the 
kindred  word  avaKaivovrai  is  used  of  daily  growth.  In  Rom. 
xii.  2  and  Titus  iii.  5  the  sense  is  the  same  as  here.  The 
word  TrapaSeiyixari^ovras  in  this  connection  is  illustrated  by  Numb. 
XXV.  4  (LXX.),  irapaSfiyixdrKTov  avTovs  Kvpicf),  and  by  the  use  of 
^SiiyixdTKTiv  in  Col.  ii.  15.  This  last  passage  probably  suggested 
the  Vulgate  rendering  here,  ostetitui  habentes,  and  still  more  the 
reading  of  St.  Ambrose,  ostentatione  triumphantes .  I  content 
myself  with  rendering  it  openly.  "  De  baptismo  dictum  credamus," 
says  St.  Ambrose,  "in  quo  crucifigimus  Filium  Dei  in  nobis;  ut 
per  ilium  nobis  mundus  crucifigatur,  qui  quadam  triumphamus 
specie,  dum  similitudinem  mortis  eius  assumimus,  qui  principatus  et 
potestates  in  sua  cruce  ostentavit  ac  triumphavit." 

There  seem  to  be  only  three  possible  interpretations  of  the 
passage  :  (i)  the  Novatian,  denying  the  possibility  of  penance  ; 
(2)  that  given  above  ;  and  (3)  the  explanation  preferred  by  many 
moderns,  which  makes  it  mean  that  recovery  from  complete 
apostasy  is  so  difficult  as  to  be  morally,  though  not  absolutely, 
impossible.  St.  Ambrose  glances  rather  contemptuously  at  the 
last  interpretation.  It  seems  to  be  excluded  by  the  fact  that  the 
writer  is  not  speaking  of  extreme  wickedness,  but  rather  of  failure 
to  make  progress. 

G  (p.  188). 

In  I  Cor.  iii.  8-15,  the  special  reference  is  to  the  apostolic  work 
of  building  up  the  Church,  but  the  teaching  is  general.  The  words 
may  refer  to  the  effect  of  the  fiery  trial  of  temptation  in  his  life, 


304       The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

as  St.  Augustine  takes  them,  but,  as  he  allows,  not  to  this  alone 
{Enchir.,  c.  68-9 ;  De  Civ.  Dei,  xxi.  26).  In  the  latter  place  he 
argues  that  the  purging  fire  cannot  be  identical  with  the  eternal  fire 
of  Matt,  XXV.  41,  but  adds  that  he  cannot  deny  the  existence  of  a 
similar  fire  by  which  souls  are  tried  between  death  and  resurrection, 
because  there  may  be  such.  Of  the  cleansing  pain  after  death  in 
general  he  says  {ibid.,  c.  13),  "  TemiDorarias  poenas  alii  in  hac  vita 
tantum,  alii  post  mortem,  alii  et  nunc  et  tunc,  verumtamen  ante 
iudicium  illud  severissimum  novissimumque  patiuntur.  Non  autem 
omnes  veniunt  in  sempiternas  poenas,  quae  post  illud  iudicium  his 
(sc.  the  lost)  sunt  futurae,  qui  post  mortem  sustinent  temporales. 
Nam  quibusdam,  quod  in  (isto  non  remittitur,  remitti  in  futm-o  sae- 
culo,  id  est,  ne  futuri  saeculi  aeterno  supplicio  puniantur,  iam  supra 
diximus."  He  seems  to  have  stumbled — pace  tanti  viri  dixerim — 
over  the  conception  of  elemental  fire  taken  in  this  connection.  It 
would  be  as  reasonable  to  take  the  "wood,  hay,  and  stubble"  in 
the  same  literal  sense. 

The  words  of  the  Council  of  Bethlehem  are  :  TouTcof  koI  avrcuv 
ras  ^vxo^s  airepxicOai  els  aSov,  koI  vvofiiveiv  tt]v  evena  wv  flpydffavro 
afj.apTri/ji.dT(cv  iroLi/rjv '  tlvai  5'  kv  alffdrjcrei  tt^s  iKe76ev  airaWayfis 
(Hardouin,  tom.  xi.  p.  255). 


H  (p.  216): 

The  definition  given  in  the  text  is  that  of  Domingo  Baiies.  It 
is  found  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Summa  llieol.,  tom.  iii.  p.  45, 
ed.  1615  :  "  Congregatio  hominum  fidelium  baptizatorum  visibilis 
sub  uno  capitc  Christo  in  caelis,  et  Vicario  eius  in  tcrris."  This 
position  is  different  from  that  of  the  Galilean  theologians,  who  held 
that  all  Christians  are  bound  indeed  by  the  Divine  law  to  be  in 
communion  with  the  Roman  Pontiff,  but  do  not,  in  default  of  such 
communion,  cease  ipso  facto  to  be  visibly  members  of  the  Church, 
and  do  not,  if  unjustly  excommunicated  by  him,  lose  any  of  the 
privileges  even  of  membership. 

Launoi  has  collected  (Lib.  viii.  Epist.  xiii.)  definitions  of  the 
Church  from  all  sources  down  to  the  sixteenth  century,  showing 
lliat  until  then  no  one  had  introduced  the  Roman  Pontiff  into  the 
definition  of  the  essence  of  the  Church.  He  accuses  Peter  Canisius 
of  first  "  deforming"  the  Church  in  the  third  edition  of  his  Cate- 
chism, anno  1587,  turning  the  Church,  as  he  says,  into  a  monarchy. 


Appendix  305 

So  far  however  the  reference  was  only  to  the  goverwnent  of  the 
Church,  not  to  its  being.  Banes  was  the  first  to  bring  the  Pope 
into  the  essence  of  the  Church.  Launoi  commends  Bellarmine, 
witliout  much  reason,  as  less  extreme. 


I  (p.  227). 

Cypr.,  De  Unit.  JSccL,  4,  5  :  "  Super  unum  aedificat  ecclesiam, 
et  quamvis  apostolis  omnibus  post  resurrectionem  suam  parem 
potestatem  tribuat  .  .  .  tamen  ut  unitatem  nianifestaret,  unitatis 
eiusdem  originem  ab  uno  incipientem  sua  auctoritate  disposuit. 
Hoc  erant  utique  et  ceteri  apostoli  quod  fuit  Petrus,  pari  consortio 
praediti  et  honoris  et  potestatis,  sed  exordium  ab  unitate  proficiscitur, 
ut  ecclesia  Christi  una  monstretur.  .  ,  .  Quam  unitatem  tenere 
firmiter  et  vindicare  debemus,  maxime  episcopi  qui  in  ecclesia 
praesidemus,  ut  episcopatum  quoque  ipsum  unum  atque  indivisum 
probemus.  .  .  .  Episcopatus  unus  est,  cuius  a  singulis  in  solidum 
pars  tenetur." 

Ep.,  Ixvi.  8  :  "  Scire  debes  episcopum  in  ecclesia  esse,  et  ecclesiam 
in  episcopo,  et  si  qui  cum  episcopo  non  sit,  in  ecclesia  non  esse, 
.  .  .  quando  ecclesia,  quae  catholica  una  est,  scissa  non  sit  neque 
divisa,  sed  sit  utique  connexa  et  cohaerentium  sibi  invicem  sacer- 
dotum  glutino  copulata." 

Ep.,  Iv.  21  :  "  Manente  concordiae  vinculo  et  perseverante 
catholicae  ecclesiae  individuo  Sacramento,  actum  suum  disponit  et 
dirigit  unusquisque  episcopus  rationem  propositi  sui  Domino 
redditurus." 


K  (p.  229). 

It  is  known  that  in  the  seventeenth  century  most  English 
divines  were  disposed  to  regard  presbyterian  ordination  as  valid, 
and  in  some  circumstances  even  lawful.  They  would  not,  however, 
suffer  men  so  ordained  to  minister  in  the  English  Church.  See 
Mr.  Denny's  English  Church  and  the  Miiiistry  of  the  Reformed 
Churches,  No.  Ivii.  of  the  Church  Historical  Society's  Tracts. 
Bramhall,  ordaining  a  certain  Edward  Parkinson  who  had  received 
presbyterian  ordination,  gave  him  letters  testimonial  of  the  fact 
containing  these  words  :  "  Non  annihilantes  priores  ordines  (si 
quos  habuit)   nee   invaliditatem   eorundem   determinantes,    multo 

X 


3o6        TJie  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

minus  omnes  ordines  sacros  Ecclesiarum  forinsecarum  condem- 
nantes,  quos  proprio  ludici  reliiKjuimus,  sed  solummodo  supplentes 
quicquid  prius  defuit  per  canones  Ecclesiae  Anglicanae  requisitum, 
et  providentes  paci  Ecclesiae,  ut  schismatis  tollatur  occasio,  et 
conscientiis  fidelium  satisfiat,  nee  ulli  dubitent  de  eius  ordinatione, 
aut  actus  suos  presbyteriales  tanquam  invalidos  aversentur " 
(Bramhall,  Works,  vol.  i.  p.  xxxvii.). 


L  (p.  230). 

Justin  M.,  Apol.,  ii.  p.  58  (ed.  Colon):  ov  SeeffduL  rrjs  irapa 
dvdpdlnrbii'  vXiKrjs  iTpoa<popa.s  TrpoeiAjicpafiiv  rhv  &f6v.  p.  60  :  a6ioi  /xev 
oiiv  dis  ovK  iffjxiv,  rhv  Sr]ixtovpyhv  TOvSe  rod  Travros  ae^6/j.fi>oi,  dyeuStij 
alfxaruv    Kol    airovSaiv    Kol    dv/uia/jLaruv,    ws    4Si5axdrifji,ev,    Aeyoi/res, 

K.T.X. 

Dial,  cum  Tryph.,  p.  260  :  Trepl  Se  twv  kv  ■ko.vtI  Tuirci}  ixp'  tj/xup 
tQv  iQvMV  Trpofftpepofxivcov  avTt^  Qvaiwv,  TovT^an  tov  apTov  ttjs 
€i5xapi(rT(a$  Kol  tov  iroTrjpiov  Oyuoicos  rrjs  euxapicrriay  izpo\4yet,. 

Athenag.,  Legaiio,  p.  13  {ibid.)  :  Qvaia  avr^  iu.eyiaT7i  iiv 
yiyvciffKUfxev  ris  e|€Teji/6  Koi  (xwecrcfiaipciKTe  rovs  ovpavovs,  K.r.\,  .  .  . 
ri  Se  jxoi  oAoKavTUKrecov,  wv  firj  SuTai  6  &eos  ;  /caiVot  irpofffpipnv  ^eov 
avaifiaKTOv  dvffiay,  ical  r-^v  XoytKriv  Trpoaayfiv  Karpeiay. 

Didache,  xiii.  3 :  ^<j>(ms  t^v  aTrapx  V  to??  ■7rpo(t>7)Tais '  ay  to!  ydp 
fl(riv  ol  apx^fpf^s  v/xwv  ;  xiv.  I-3  '■  Kara  KvpiaKrjv  Se  Kvpiov  (TwaxS^vTe^ 
KXaffare  aprov  koI  fuxotpiCTi^traTe  Trpoe^o/ii,o\oy7]adiJ.€Voi  TCt  trapa- 
irrufMara  v/j.wi',  ottws  KaOapa  rj  Bvaia  vfioiiv  >j  .  .  .  a'vrri  yap  i(TTiv  7; 
p7i9e7(Ta  virh  Kvpiov  '  ev  ■Kavrl  tJttoj  koI  xP'^^V  Trpoatpepftv  ixoi  Bvcriav 
KaOapdv. 

Clem.  Rom.,  Ad  Cor.,  44  :  XnTovpyiav — KeiTovpyijcravTas — ua-'ius 
TrpoaeveyKOVTas  to.  Swpa. 

Ignat.,  Ad  Philad.,  4  :  pXa  yap  aap^  rod  Kvpiov  rifxSiv  'Ir;crof; 
XpicTToP,  KoX  %v  TTOT^ipiov  (IS  evccaiu  rod  a'iiJ.aros  avrov  '  tv  Qv(na(TTi)pLOV, 
ws  els  fTriaKOTTOS,  a/xa  ry  irpicrfivripiw,  ual  ^laKovois  to7s-  avvZovKois 
fxov,  'Iva  h  iav  ■Kpd(rar\ri  Kara  &ehv  irpdaayjri. 


M  (p.  247). 

Aug.,  Ep.  138,  ad  Marcell.,  §  7:  "Cum  ad  res  divinas 
pertinent  sacramenta  appellantur."  Cp.  his  Serm.  272,  "Ista  di- 
cuntur  sacramenta,  quia  in  eis   aliud   videtur,  aliud    intellegitur," 


Appendix  307 

where  also  the  absolute  identity  of  mysta-iiiiii  and  sacramenticni  is 
illustrated.  "Mysterium  vestrum,"  he  says,  "in  niensa  dominica 
posit;im  est,"  sc.  the  Mystery  or  Sacrament  of  what  you  yourselves 
are,  the  Body  of  Christ.  In  De  Civ.  Dei,  x.  5,  he  defines  sacraniciitiim 
simply  as  sacrum  signum.  Towards  the  end  of  the  seventh  century 
Isidore  of  Seville  more  formally  defined  it  thus  :  "  Sacramentum 
est  in  aliqua  celebratione,  cum  res  gesta  ita  fit,  ut  aliquid  significari 
intellegatur  quod  sancte  accipiendum  est"  {Elym.,  vi.  19). 

Tertullian  glances  at  the  military  oath  when  he  says  {Ad 
Martyres,  3),  "  Vocati  sumus  ad  militiam  Dei  vivi,  iam  tunc  cum  in 
sacramenti  verba  respondimus."  Caeciliusof  Biltha,  in  the  Cartha- 
ginian Council  convened  by  St.  Cyprian,  used  the  phrase  "sacra- 
mentum interrogat "  in  much  the  same  sense  of  the  question  put 
to  the  candidates  at  baptism  (Cypr.,  ed.  Hartel,  p.  437).  The 
statement  of  Pliny  {Ep.  97)  about  the  Christians  of  his  province, 
"  Afiirmabant  .  .  .  se  saa-amento  non  in  scelus  aliquod  obstringere," 
etc.,  shows  that  the  word  was  already  established  in  Christian  use, 
and  that  he  himself  was  puzzled  by  it,  thinking  only  of  its  legal  or 
military  sense. 


N  (p.  251). 

Since  the  extreme  requirement  of  a  right  intention  has  found 
favour  only  in  the  Roman  schools,  it  may  be  expected  to  disappear 
in  face  of  the  express  declaration  of  Leo  XIII.  in  his  Bull  Apostolicae 
Cjirae:  "  De  mente  vel  intentione,  utpote  quae  per  se  quiddam 
est  interius,  Ecclesia  non  iudicat  :  at  quatenus  extra  proditur, 
iudicare  de  ea  debet.  Iam  vero  quum  quis  ad  sacramentum 
conficiendum  et  conferendum  materiam  formamque  debitam 
serio  ac  rite  adhibuit,  eo  ipso  censetur  id  nimirum  facere  inten- 
disse  quod  facit  Ecclesia."  It  may  be  interesting  to  contrast  with 
this  the  opinion  expressed  three  years  previously  by  Gasparri  in  his 
tractate  De  Sacra  Ordinatione,  n.  968:  "  Ordinatio  foret  nulla 
prorsus,  si  minister  intendit  quidem  facere  quod  facit  Ecclesia 
Christi,  sed  simul  actu  positivo  et  explicito  voluntatis  non  vult  con- 
ficere  sacramentum,  aut  ritum  sacrum,  aut  facere  quod  facit  Ecclesia 
Romana,  aut  conferre  potestatem  ordinis,  aut  imprimere  charac- 
terem,"  etc. 

Whatever  else  may  be  the  result  of  this  Bull,  directed  against  the 
validity  of  Anglican   ordinations,    those  whose   action   led  to  its 


3o8        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

publication  may  be  thankful  if  they  have  indirectly  helped  for- 
ward a  return  to  reasonable  opinions  on  the  question  of  intention. 
The  position  now  taken  is  practically  that  of  St.  Thomas  Aquinas : 
"Minister  sacramenti  agit  in  persona  totius  Ecclesiae,  cuius  est 
minister ;  in  verbis  autem,  quae  profert,  exprimitur  intentio 
Ecclesiae,  quae  sufficit  ad  perfectionem  sacramenti,  nisi  contrarium 
exterius  exprimatur  ex  parte  ministri,  vel  recipientis  sacramentum." 

{s.  r.,  3.  64.  8). 


O  (p.  258). 

Cyr.  Hieros.,  Cat.  Mystag.,  iv.  9:  6  <paivujx(vos  apros  ovk  apros 
iffrlv,  it  Kol  T'^  yevffft  alcrdriThs,  aWa  cr&i/xa  Xptarov '  Kal  6  (paiuofjLfvos 
olvos    OVK    oivos    iffTiv,    el    koI  r)   yevais  tovto  ^ovAerai,   dWa  ai/na 

XpiffTOV. 

August.,  Serm.,  cclxxii.  :  "Ista,  fratres,  ideo  dicuntur  Sacra- 
menta,  quia  in  eis  aliud  videtur,  aliud  intellegitur  ;  quod  videtur 
speciem  habet  corporalem,  quod  intellegitur  fructum  habet  spiri- 
talem. "  See  the  argument  of  Card.  Franzelin,  de  obiectiva  realitate 
specierum  sacratnentalium  {De  ss.  Buck.,  thes.  xvi.),  in  which  he 
shows  that  what  is  changed  is  t^  voovfjuvov. 

The  statement  that  our  Lord  did  not  call  bread  his  Body  and 
wine  his  Blood  does  not  follow  grammatically  from  the  use  of  the 
neuter  tovto  in  the  first  sentence  of  the  Institution,  as  some  have 
thought.  That  argument  is  indeed  futile.  It  follows  from  the 
logical  structure  of  the  sentence,  in  which  tovto  is  merely  apodeictic, 
indicating  an  unnamed  subject,  while  in  the  second  sentence  the 
contents  of  the  cup  are  equally  unnamed,  except  predicatively  as 
the  Blood  of  Christ.  Gardiner  was  so  far  right  in  his  controversy 
with  Cranmer,  though  he  spoilt  his  argument  by  adhering  to  the 
scholastic  attempt  at  fixing  the  moment  of  the  sacramental  change. 
It  is  not  a  case  of  disparate  terms  joined  by  the  copula.  The 
parallels  often  cited — e.g.  "That  rock  was  Christ,"  or  "The  seed 
is  the  word  " — are  therefore  beside  the  mark.  Tertullian  was  in- 
accurate when  he  wrote  the  words  "  panem  Corpus  suum 
appellans  "  (/4i/z'.  hid.,  id).  Observe  ■noTj]pLov  used  in  the  sense 
of  TTO/xo  in  Matt,  xx,  22  ;  John  xviii.  11  ;  i  Cor.  x.  21  ;  xi.  27. 


Appendix  309 


P(p.  260). 

Taylor,  Clerus  Domini,  sect.  vii.  15,  16.  Observe  that  Taylor 
does  not  himself  call  ordination  a  Sacrament.  Like  other  English 
divines  of  the  seventeenth  century,  he  tied  the  word  to  a  narrow 
sense,  which  could  not  be  justified  from  history.  The  appeal  to 
antiquity  should  have  led  them  rather  to  widen  its  meaning.  All, 
I  believe,  without  exception,  taught  that  in  ordination  there. was 
conferred,  not  only  an  official  capacity,  but  also  a  "grace  of 
ability,"  which  endowed  the  recipient  personally  with  powers 
proper  to  his  function,  so  rendering  him  in  Taylor's  phrase 
"gracious  and  loved  by  God."  It  is  needless  to  multiply  quota- 
tions, but  this  from  Barrow  has  a  special  value  :  "  To  every  vocation 
God's  aid  is  congruously  afforded,  but  to  this  (the  principal  of  all 
others,  the  most  important,  most  nearly  related  to  God,  and  most 
peculiarly  tending  to  his  service)  it  is  in  a  special  manner  most 
assuredly  and  plentifully  imparted"  (IFor/cs,  vol.  i.  p.  528,  ed. 
1847).  This  aid  or  auxiliary  grace  "most  assuredly  imparted  "  is 
exactly  what  is  meant  by  the  sacramental  grace  of  ordination, 
according  to  the  definition  of  Gasparri  {De  Sacr.  Ordin.,  n.  1 1 30), 
"  Gratia  sacrainentalis,  qua  ordinatus  valet  functiones  recepti 
ordinis  sancte  peragere."  The  conclusion  of  Bramhall,  who  allows 
that  ordination  is  "in  a  larger  sense  "  a  sacrament,  is  singularly 
convincing  :  •'  It  is  folly  to  wrangle  about  the  word,  when  we  agree 
upon  the  thing"  [Works,  vol.  i.  p.  272  and  vol.  v.  p.  189). 


Q  (p.  261). 

The  liturgical  blessing  of  the  oil  for  the  sick  appears  in  the  Canons 
of  Hippolytiis  (Achelis,  iii.  \  28,  in  Texte  uud  UntcrsucJiungen), 
which  represent  either  the  Roman  or  the  Alexandrian  use  of  the 
third  century  ;  and  in  the  prayers  of  Serapion  of  Thmuis  in 
Egypt,  c.  A.D.  360,  where  the  anointing  oil  is  coupled  with  water 
to  be  drunk  by  the  sick,  Sircos  ■ku.s  Trvperhs  koI  irciv  Sai/noytou  koI 
TTctca  vocros  81a.  ttjs  iroaeus  Kal  ttjs  a.\ei\peciis  airaWayi]  (pp.  7  and 
13,  in  Tcxtc  und  Untersuc/mngen).  In  the  fifth  century  at  Rome,  oil 
blessed  by  the  Bishop  might  be  applied  by  the  sick  person  himself  or 
any  bystander.  See  Innoc.  I.,  Ep.,  i.  8.  The  Greek  and  Russian 
Churches  appoint  seven  priests  to  minister  the  unction,  who  bless  the 


310       The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 

oil  at  the  time  of  administration,  but  one  may  act  alone  in  case  of 
need. 

The  title  Unctio  extrema,  used  by  Peter  Lombard,  means 
only  the  last  of  the  anointings  used  in  the  Church.  It  is  a  mere 
blunder  to  infer  from  the  name  that  the  anointing  is  intended  only 
for  those  ?'«  extremis.  The  Rituale  Roiiiaiiuvi  orders  it  more 
especially  for  those  periculose  aegrotantibus,  without  confining  it  to 
them ;  but  forbids  its  repetition  in  the  same  sickness,  unless  it  be 
long  continued,  or  unless  after  partial  recovery  the  peril  of  death 
recurs.  The  Office  includes  the  prayer:  "  Plenamque  interius  et 
exterius  sanitatem  misericorditer  redde  :  ut  ope  misericordiae  tuae 
restitutus,  ad  pristina  reparetur  officia."  Of  the  effect,  St.  Thomas 
Aq.,  in  Opusc.  iv.,  says  simply,  "  effectus  huius  sacramenti  est 
sanatio  mentis  et  corporis." 

R  (p.  287). 

St.  Thom.  Aq.  (^.  7.,  1-2.  loS.  4)  adopts  the  distinction  in  this 
form  :  "  Haec  est  differentia  inter  consilium  et  praeceptum,  quod 
praeceptum  importat  necessitatem,  consilium  autem  in  optione 
ponitur  eius  cui  datur."  But  he  is  here  thinking  of  the  three  general 
heads  of  counsels  "  simpliciter  proposita,"  v\z.  poverty,  chastity, 
and  obedience,  theologically  understood.  He  recognizes,  passim, 
that  a  particular  counsel  may  be  obligatory  on  a  particular  person. 
The  question  is  whether,  if  it  be  not  obligatory,  it  applies  to  the 
person  at  all.  He  says  {ibid.),  "  Cum  homo  dat  aliquam  eleemosy- 
nam  pauperi,  quando  dare  non  tenetur,  consilium  sequitur  quantum 
ad  factum  illud."  It  seems  safer  to  say  that  in  every  given  case  a 
man  either  ought  or  ought  not  to  give  alms,  the  determination  often 
being  very  difficult.  If  he  does  it  when  he  ought  not,  he  is  not 
following  the  counsel,  but  missing  his  way. 


S  (p.  289). 

The  Greek  -riXos,  unlike  the  Latin  Jiiiis,  or  the  English  e)id, 
seems  in  classical  writers  never  to  be  connected  with  the  idea  of 
cessation  ;  it  always  signifies  completion.  In  LXX.  the  word  has 
acquired  the  other  meaning,  and  so  in  N.T.,  e.g.  Luke  i.  33  ; 
Heb.  vii.  3.  The  meaning  of  riXeios  however  is  fixed  exclusively 
by   the    original    sense   of    reAos  ;    it   signifies    that    which    has 


Appendix  3 1 1 

attained  the  end  or  completion  of  its  being  and  so  continues.  In 
the  Latin  and  English  versions  of  the  N.T.  perfcctits  and  perfect  are 
used  also  to  represent  such  words  as  a.Kpi^T]s  and  KaTr]pTL(r/j.eyos, 
the  latter  of  which  varies  from  reAeios  only  as  not  introducing  the 
idea  of  the  end  or  purpose  of  being.  The  passages  in  which 
the  reader  of  the  English  Bible  must  be  on  his  guard  are  Luke 
i.  3;  vi.  40;  Acts  iii.  i6 ;  xviii.  26;  xxii.  3  ;  xxiii.  15,  20; 
xxiv.  22  ;  I  Cor.  i.  10  ;  2  Cor.  xiii.  9,  II  ;  Eph.  iv.  12  (cp.  13)  ; 
I  Thess.  iii.  10;  v.  2  ;  2  Tim.  iii.  17  ;  Heb.  xiii.  21  ;  i  Pet.  v  10  ; 
Rev.  iii.  2.  In  none  of  these  do  the  words  reAeios  or  reAeioTTjs 
occur. 


J 


INDEX 


Numbers  refer  to  pages.  Letters  to  the  Notes  in  the  Appendix 


Aerius,  227 

Albigenses,  the,  75 

Ambrose,  St.,  on  Penance, 
255,  256,  F 

Analogies,  terms  of  Christian 
doctrine  founded  on,  30 

Angels,  103 

Animal  life,  nature  of,  115 

Anthropomorphism,  91 

ApoUinarianism,  145 

Apostasy,  201 

Apostles,  commission  of  the, 
II,  35,  221,  258 

,  credentials  of  the,  51-54 

,  founders  of  the  Christian 

tradition,  11,  217 

,  guardians  of  the  Christian 

tradition,  12 

,  rulers  of  the  Church,  220 

,  witnesses  of  the  Resur- 
rection, 52 

Apostolate,  unity  of  the,  226 

Aquinas,  St.  Thomas,  on  the 
begiftning,  93 

,  on  the  birth  of  Christ,  151 

,  on  confession  to  a  layman, 

256 

,  on  the  counsels  of  per- 
fection, 293,  294,  R 

,  on  Intention,  N 

,  on  the  meaning  of  Spirit, 

77 


313 


Aquinas,  St.  Thomas,  on  origi- 
nal sin,  123 

,  quoted,  71,  95,   127,   133, 

177,  184,  Q 

Arianism,  85,  95,  146 

Aristotle,  33,  39,  182 

Arminianism,  E 

Ascension,  the,  160 

Aseitas,  71 

Athanasius,  St.,  on  the  cor- 
ruption of  nature,  124,  D 

,  on  the  limited  knowledge 

of  Christ,  154 

,  on  the  purpose  of  the  In- 
carnation, 143 

,     on     the     sufficiency    of 

Scripture,  22 

,  quoted,  78,  120,  127,  152, 

216,  228,  F 

Athenagoras,  on  sacrifice,  230,  L 

Atonement,  natural  ideas  of,  32 

Augsburg,  Confession  of,  36 

Augustine,  St.,  on  the  authority 
of  the  Church  as  a  motive  to 
belief,  58,  59,  B 

,  on  the  constitution  of  a 

Sacrament,  248,  ISI,  O 

,  on  creation,  98 

,  on  the  image  of  God  in 

man,  1 10 

,  on    the    number    of   the 

Sacraments,  247 


314        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 


Augustine,  St.,  on  prevenient 
and  subsequent  grace,  177 

,  on  purgatorial  pain,  G 

,    on   the    Sermon    on    the 

Mount,  288 

,  quoted,  103,  112,  170,  216, 

246,  258 
Authority  of  the  Church,  19,  58 

of  the  Master,  8,  27 

of  the  Son  of  Man,  233,  234 

of  theologians,  66 

Auxiliary  grace,  171 

Banes,  definition  of  the 
Church,  216,  H 

Barrow,  on  the  grace  of  ordina- 
tion, P 

Beatific  vision,  the,  188 

Beatitude,  90,  no,  187 

Beginning,  the,  92 

Belief,  the  duty  of,  44 

Beveridge,  on  the  catholicity  of 
local  churches,  217 

Body,  the,  its  creation,  114 

,  its  mortality,  1 1 7 

,  its    relation  to  the   soul, 

loi 

,  its  resurrection,  102 

Boethius,  on  the  meaning  of 
Person,  79 

Bramhall,  on  the  authority  of 
Councils,  64,  69 

,  on  infallibility,  56 

,  on  Presbyterian  ordina- 
tion, K 

,    on    the    Proposition    of 

Faith,  50 

,  on  the  Rule  of  Faith,  22 

,    on    the     Sacrament     of 

Ordination,  P 

Browning,  Robert,  on  Original 
Sin,  125 

Calvin     on     Holy    Scripture, 

56,  B 
Calvinism,  166,  173,  200,  E 


Canisius,    Petrus,    definition    of 

the  Church,  H 
Canon  Law,  239 
Canon  of  Scripture,  23 
Casuistry,  67 
Catechism,  the  Racovian,  147 

,  the  Russian,  189 

,  the  Scottish,  no 

Certainty  of  Faith,  8,  28 
Charismata,  172,  231,  259,  P 
Church,   the,   and    the    Secular 

Power,  240 
,     authority    of,    in     con- 
troversies, 19,  239 

,  definitions  of,  216,  II 

,  general  function  of,  39 

,  guardian  of  tradition,  13 

,  infallibility  of,  55 

,  interpreter  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture, 22,  60 

,  membership  in,  41,  292 

,  precepts  of,  67,  283 

,  proponent  of  faith,  55-59 

,  teaching  of,  61,  65,  239 

,  witness    to  the  teaching 

of  Christ,  13 
Clement,  St.,  37,  189,224,226, 

230,  L 
Colluthus,  227 

Commandments,    possibility    of 
keeping  the,  127,  295 

,  limitation  of  the,  287 

Conummicatio   idiomatiim,   149, 

153 

Concupiscence,  14,  126 
Confession,  255,  256 
Confessions,    Reformed,  on  the 

Sacred  Ministry,  36,  A 
Cojisiibstantial,  the  word,  78 
Corban,  279 

Corruption  of  nature,  121,  124 
Council  of  Ariminium,  64 

of  Bethlehem,  189,  G 

of  Carthage,  253,  254,  M 

of  Chalcedon,  148 

of  Ephesus,  147 


Index 


315 


Council  of  Florence,  83,  254 

of  Nicaea,  63,  78 

Councils,  authority  of,  64 

Cranmer,  O 

Credentials  of  Christ,  45,  48,  57 

of  the  Apostles,  51-54 

Creeds,    the,    their   relation   to 

Holy  Scripture,  26 
Cyprian,  St.,  on  deadly  sin,  180 
,    on  the  episcopate,    226, 

227,  I 
,  quoted,  22,  246,  253,  254, 

256,  M 
Cyril   of   Jerusalem,    St.,    245, 

257.  o 

Damascene,  St.  John,  16,  70 
Darwell     Stone,      Outlines     of 

Christian  Dogma,  S3 
Death,  eternal,  187 

,  the  nature  of,  120 

,  the  second,  179 

Definitions  of  faith,  19 
Deism,  97,  170 
Demons,  76,  103,  108 
Departed,  prayer  for  the,  202 
Didache,  the,  221,  223,  230,  L 
Disciple,  the  faith  of  the,  2,  27 

,  the  relation  of  Master  and, 

I,  2,  9,  235 
Discipline  of  the  Church,  con- 
troversies about  the,  41,  42 
Doceticism,  145 
Dogmata,  283,  284 
Donatists,  the,  40,  214,  215 
Dordrecht,  Synod  of,  E 
Dualism,  74 

Ecclesia,  193,  200,  207 

downs,  238 

Edersheim,     on     binding     and 

loosing,  236,  237 
Effectual  grace,  177,  E 
Election,  196-198 
"Ej/epye^a,  1 82 


Episcopate,  origin  of  the  historic, 

224,  225 

,  unity  of  the,  227,  I 

Eternity,  72,  87 

Eucharist,    institution    of    the, 

161 
Eugenius  IV.,  254 
Evidence,  6 

Evidences,  Christian,  8 
Evil,  origin  of,  106 

,  toleration  of,  130 

Evolution  in  creation,  98,  115 
Excommunication,  201 
Expiation,  164 

Faith,  definitions  of,  19 

,  of  Christendom,  6 

,  of  the  Disciple,  1-6,  27 

,  rule  of,  22,  28 

,  supernatural,  3 

Fatherhood,     in     what      sense 

spoken  of  God,  30,  76,  86 
Field,     on     the     authority     of 

Councils,  65 

,  quoted,  112 

Franzelin,  Card.,  O 

Freedom    of   the  creature,    31, 

94,  105,  106 

Gallicanism,  H 

Gardiner,  O 

Gasparri,  on  intention,  N 

,  on  the  grace  of  ordina- 
tion, P 

Generation  in  the  Divine  Nature, 
82 

Geographical  ordering  of  the 
Church,  209 

Gerson,  on  the  state  of  per- 
fection, 294 

Tviixns,  102,  296 

Goode,  23 

Gore,  77/6'  Church  and  the 
Ministry,  37,  222,  225 

Green,  Prof.  T.  H.,  quoted,  98 


3i6        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 


HiPPOLYTUS,  Canons  of,  Q 
Holiness,  nature  of,  211 

of  God,  the,  108 

Hooker,  on  Certainty,  8,  28 
,   on   the   authority   of  the 

Church,  25 
,  on  the  way  of  salvation, 

134 

,  quoted,  36,  59,  86 

Hort,    The   Chn'sliaji   Ecclesia, 

35.  38,  193.  194.  208,  209 
Hugh  of  St.  Victor,  247 
Hume,  theoiy  of  causation,  4 
Hypostasis,  78 
Hypostatic  Union,  the,  147 

Idol-offerings,  268,  272 
Ignatius,  St.,  quoted,  103,  149, 

223,  228,  230,  252,  L 
Illingworth,  Divine  Immanence^ 

52 
Immutability,  87 
Infant  Communion,  260 
Inferences,  peril  of,  29 
Infinity,  73,  87,  93 
Innocence,  117 
Innocent  I.,  Q 

III.,  263,  264 

IV.,  250 

Ircnaeus,  St.,  121,  215,  258 

Ischyras,  227 

Isidore  of  Seville,  256,  M 

Jansenism,  166,  173,  E 
Jerome,  St.,  225,  227,228,  245 
Jerusalem,  the  new,  192 
Judaism,  278 
Judgment,  the,  185,  188 

by  the  Son  of  Man, 234,  235 

Justice  of  God,  the,  108 
Justification,  173,  178,  180 
Justin  Martyr,  St.,  on  sacrifice, 
229,  230,  L 

Khomiakoff,  on  the  nature  of 
Scripture,  25 


Khomiakoff,  on  the  state  of  the 

departed,  203 
Kingdom  of  God,  the,  198,  199 
KJo-^os,  135 
Knowledge,  89 

of  Christ,  the  human,  153 

of  God,  the,  184,  265 

Kurtz,  on  sacrifice,  139 

Lactantius,  246 

Latham,  The  Risen  Master,  54 

Launoi,    on    definition   of    the 

Church,  H 
Law,  authority  of,  285 

,  Canon,  239 

,  corruption  of  human,  129 

,  nature  of  the  Divine,  119, 

130 
AeiToyp-yJs,  229 
Leo  the  Great,  St.,  246 

XIII.,  on  intention,  N 

Liddon,  153 
Likeness  to  God,  117 

Maldonatus,  18 

Manichaeism,  75 

Master    and    Disciple,    relation 

of,  I,  2,  9 

,  autliority  of  tlie,  8,  27 

> ,  incommunicable,  10 

Materialism,  75 

Melchizedek,  158 

Mercy  of  God,  the,  109 

Merit,  278 

yieravoiiv,  176 

Ministry,     the    sacred,     34-39, 

223,  227 
Miracle,  the  witness  of,  3 
Moberly,  Ministerial  Priesthood, 

37,  208,  260 
Monism,  75 
Monophysitism,  148 
Monothclites,  the,  148 
Moore,  Aubrey,  quoted,  74 
Moral  theology,  67 


Index 


317 


•  Morality,  natural,  276 

of  the  Old  Testament,  277 

Mortification,  180 
MvcTT-qpiov,  241-245 

Name  of  God,  the,  71,  80 

Natural  Law,  4,  276 

Religion,  i,  5,  14,  31, 

49,  71,  92,  270 

Nestorianism,  146 

New    Testament,    character    of 
the  Scriptures  of  the,  21,  38 

,  importance  of  the  Scrip- 
tures of  the,  22 

,  selection  of  the  Scriptures 

of  the,  23 

Nicaea,  Council  of,  63,  78 

Nicholson,     Exposition     of   the 
Catechism,,  264 

Novatianism,  179,  214,  F 

Obedience,  282-285 
Obligation,  48,  275,  291 
Ockham,  B 
Old  Testament,    authorship    of 

books  of  the,  17 

,  morality  of  the,  277 

,  ordinances  of  the,  284 

,   the,    supplemented     and 

corrected  in  the  New,  15 
Omnipotence,  99 
Omnipresence,  94,  99 
Omniscience,  99 
'O/uooucrioj,  78 
"'OpYat'ov,  95 
Original  sin,  123,  124 
Ovaia,  78 

Pantheism,  73,  75,  94 

Pascal,  E 

Pearson,  On  the  Creed,  210-212 

Pelagianism,  124,  170,  171,  173 

Person,  the  word,  78,  79 

Personality,  102 

Peter  Lombard,  247 

Philo,  77,  95.  96,  99>  "4.  242 


Picquigny,  B.  de,  C 

DATjpco^a,  73 

Pliny,  the  word  sacrament,  M 

Tlo\[Tev/xa,  192 

Polytheism,  75,  76,  88,  91 

Presbyterian  ordination,  229,  K 

Priesthood,  ministerial,  229-231 

of  Christ,  158 

of  the  Church,  213 

Probability,  68,  273 
Procession,  81,  82,  86 

the  double,  83,  84 

Prophecy,  136 

Prophets,  New  Testament,  217, 

221 
Propitiation,  164 
Proposition  of  the  Church,  the, 

ordinary  and  solemn,  62,  63 
Providence,  97,  99,  105 
"Vvx^kSs,  C 
Purgatory,  189,  203 
Puritans,  214 
Pusey,  quoted,  23 

Questions,  open,  65,  68 

Padii,  the  title,  236,  237 
Reasonableness  of  religion,  58, 

R 
Redemption,      natural        ideas 

about,  32,  165 

,  universal,  166 

Regeneration,  178,  184 
Responsibility,  human,  45,  47, 

129,  274 
Resurrection  of  the  body,  the, 

102,  185,  186,  295 

,  witness  of  the,  46,  54 

Revelation,  completeness  of,  15 

,  exclusiveness  of,  17 

,  interpretation  of,  18 

,  nature  of,  13 

of  the  Moral  Law,  276 

Righteousness  of  God,  the,  90 
,  supernatural,  117,  123 


3i8        The  Elements  of  Christian  Doctrine 


Roman  Pontiff  and  the  definition 

of  the  Church,  the,  2i6,  H 
Rule  of  Faith,  the,  22,  69 

Sacrifice  of  Christ,  159,  161 

of  Isaac,  131 

in  the  Old  Testament,  138, 

158 
,  the  Christian,    163,    213, 

230 
Sabellianism,  79,  80,  84 
Sanctification,  176 
Satan,  107 
Satisfaction,  164 
Scotist  theory   of  original    sin, 

123 
Scripture,  Holy,  sufficiency   of, 

22,  56,  60 
Semipelagianism,  170 
Sense,    all    natural    knowledge 

founded  on,  104,  115 
Serapion,  prayers  of,  R 
Sin,  actual,  132 

as  lawlessness,  119 

,  original,  123 

• ,  the  capacity  of,  107 

Socinianism,  85 

Soul,  the  nature  of  the,  loi,  114 

Spirit,  the  meaning  of,  74,  77, 

C 
,    the    disembodied,     10 1, 

187 
Substance,  the  word,  78 
Substitution,  165 
Sufficiency  of    proposition,   45, 

49,  55.  59,  275 

of  Scripture,  22,  56,  60 

Sufficient  grace,  177,  K 
Supernatural  good,  133 

truths,  28 

Synagogue,  193,  207 

Taylor,  Jeremy,  on  the  grace 
of  Ordination,  259,  P 


TeAeios,  243,  289,  S 
Tertullian,   on    the  minister  of 

Baptism,  252 

,  on  the  Rule  of  Faith,  22 

,  quoted,  19,  245,  254,  M,  O 

Theodore  of  Mopsuestia,  146 
Theodosius,  216 
Theology,  the  place  of,  65-68 
Theotokos,  the  title  of,  147 
Thomassin,    on    the    Christian 

Sacrifice,  162 
Thorndike,  quoted,  7,  33 
QpTjcTKela,  265 
Tree  of  Knowledge,   the,    113, 

1x8 

of  Life,  the,  113,  116,  133 

Tri theism,  80,  84 
Truth  of  God,  the,  108 

Unbelief,  the  sin  of,  45,  49 
Uniformity  of  nature,  97,  98 
Unitarianism,  84,  147 
Unity  of  God,  71-73,  87 

of  the  Divine  Law,  280 

Universal  redemption,  166 
^Tiro/jLOvfi,  295 

Vicar  of  Christ,  the,  41 
Vicarious  offering,  165 
Virgin-birth,  the,  151 
Virtues,  natural,  126,  128 

Waldensis,  B 

War,  acts  of,  132,  287 

Will,  89 

■,  the  existence  of  created, 

104,  106 

of  Christ,  the  twofold,  155 

Wisdom  of  God,  the,  99 
W^ord,  the,  77,  232 

,  creation  by  the,  95,  99 

World,  the  ruin  of  the,  129 

,  salvation  of  the,  135 

Worship,  Christian,  281 


BY   THE   SAME   AUTHOR 


Demy  %vo.     \s.  net. 
RESERVATION  :  A  Letter  to  His  Grace 
the  Lord  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 

"A  closely-reasoned  rhjime  oi  the  whole  matter  from  primitive 
times  clown  to  our  own  day,  and  has  the  merit  of  dealing  fairly  and 
coolly  with  the  arguments  that  have  been  and  can  be  urged  against 
■Reservation,  its  use  and  abuse." — Church  Times. 


Demy  %vo.      \s.  net. 
THE  ACTS  OF  UNIFORMITY :  Their  Scope 
and  Effect. 

"A  short  essay  which  deserves  the  notice  of  students  of  ecclesi- 
astical history  ;  for  Mr.  Lacey  makes  his  points  clearly,  and  some 
of  them,  if  not  absolutely  new,  are  newly  fashioned." 

— English  Historical  A'ez'ie^v. 

LONDON  :    RIVINGTONS 


Date  Due 

jr  -,     ..V 

r  »  r- .    i 

iW?  f  i'-^- 

f) 

